Appendix B1 - Region of Durham

Transcription

Appendix B
Existing Conditions Reports
B1. Natural Heritage Existing Conditions Report,
GENIVAR
B2. Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment, ARA Limited
B3. Stage 2 Archaeological Assessment, ARA Limited
B4. Preliminary Hydrogeological and Geotechnical
Assessment, GENIVAR
B1. Natural Heritage Existing Conditions Report, GENIVAR
Durham – Re-routing of Three Sanitary
Sewers in the City of Pickering
Schedule B Class Environmental
Assessment
Natural Heritage Existing Conditions
Report
Regional Municipality of Durham
September 2013
Prepared for:
605 Rossland Road, East. 1st Floor
Whitby, Ontario L1N 6A3
Prepared by:
GENIVAR Inc.
126 Don Hillock Drive, Unit 2
Aurora, Ontario L4G 0G9
Project No. 131-13092-00
Distribution:
1 c Client
1 c File
Project No. 131-13092-00
September 23, 2013
Wendy Houlberg, P.Eng.
Project Manager
Engineering Planning and Studies
Environmental Services
The Regional Municipality of Durham
th
605 Rossland Road, East. 5 Floor
Whitby, Ontario L1N 6A3
Re:
Durham – Pickering Sanitary Sewer System Diversion
Schedule B Class Environmental Assessment
Natural Heritage Existing Conditions Report
Dear Ms. Houlberg:
GENIVAR has been retained to conduct a Natural Heritage Existing Conditions Report as part of
the Schedule B Class Environmental Assessment for the diversion of three sanitary sewer
systems in the City of Pickering. The area studied can be described as Part of Lots 22, 23, 24 and
25, Concession 2, City of Pickering, Regional Municipality of Durham.
This report outlines the existing conditions in the study area at the time of the 2013 site visits, and
provides an assessment of the potential impacts associated with the proposed sanitary sewer
alignments. Also provided are recommendations to mitigate potential impacts. Please find the
document attached for your records.
Thank you for the opportunity to complete this assignment. Please contact the undersigned with
any questions or comments.
Yours truly,
GENIVAR Inc.
Dan J. Reeves, B.Sc., M.Sc.
Project Biologist
EAC:nah
C:\Users\nancy.horan\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\OJ7EI3J5\EAC-R Pickering Class EA.doc
126 Don Hillock Drive, Unit 2, Aurora, Ontario L4G 0G9
Telephone: 905.750.3080  Fax: 905.727.0463 www.genivar.com
Durham – Re-routing of Three Sanitary Sewers in the city of Pickering – Schedule B Class Environmental Assessment
Natural Heritage Existing Conditions Report, Regional Municipality of Durham
Table of Contents
1. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................... 1 2. ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY CONTEXT ...................................................................................... 1 2.1 2.2 2.3 Provincial Policy Statement ........................................................................................................ 1 Environmental Assessment Act .................................................................................................. 2 Conservation Authorities Act ...................................................................................................... 2 3. AGENCY CONSULTATION ......................................................................................................... 3 4. DESKTOP REVIEW..................................................................................................................... 3 4.1 Study Area Background Information ........................................................................................... 4 4.1.1 Species of Conservation Concern............................................................................... 4 4.1.2 Natural Heritage Features ........................................................................................... 5 5. SITE INFORMATION ................................................................................................................... 5 5.1 5.2 Site Investigation......................................................................................................................... 5 Study Area Description ............................................................................................................... 6 5.2.1 Field Observations ...................................................................................................... 6 6. ASSESSMENT OF NATURAL HERITAGE FEATURES ............................................................. 8 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 Fish Habitat ................................................................................................................................. 8 Significant Areas of Natural and Scientific Interest..................................................................... 9 Significant Habitat of Endangered or Threatened Species......................................................... 9 Biophysical Inventories/Observations ....................................................................................... 10 6.4.1 Bird Populations ........................................................................................................ 10 6.4.1.1 6.4.1.2 6.5 6.6 6.7 6.8 6.9 Survey Methodology .............................................................................................. 11 Survey Results ....................................................................................................... 11 6.4.2 Wildlife ....................................................................................................................... 12 6.4.3 Herpetofauna............................................................................................................. 13 Significant Wetlands ................................................................................................................. 13 Significant Wildlife Habitat ........................................................................................................ 14 Significant Woodlands .............................................................................................................. 15 Significant Valleylands .............................................................................................................. 15 Significant Feature Summary ................................................................................................... 16 7. PROPOSED WORKS ................................................................................................................ 17 8. IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES ............................................................................... 17 8.1 8.2 Potential Impacts ...................................................................................................................... 17 Mitigation Measures .................................................................................................................. 18 9. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .......................................................................... 20 10. CLOSURE ................................................................................................................................. 21 11. LITERATURE CITED ................................................................................................................. 22 GENIVAR
C:\Users\nancy.horan\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.Outlook\OJ7EI3J5\EAC-R
Pickering Class EA.doc
i
List of Tables
Table 1
Table 2
Table 3
Table 4
Table 5
NHIC Records for Species of Conservation Concern ......................................................... 4
Details of Site Visits ............................................................................................................ 5
Bird Species at Risk Habitat Potential and Field Observations ........................................ 10
Mammal Species at Risk Habitat Potential and Field Observations................................. 12
Significant Feature Summary............................................................................................ 16
List of Figures
Figure 1
Figure 2
Location Map..................................................................................................................... 25
Natural Heritage Features ................................................................................................. 26
Appendices
Appendix A
Appendix B
Appendix C
Appendix D
GENIVAR
Agency Correspondence
NHIC Search Results
Record of Species Observed during the Site Investigation
Site Photographs
ii
1.
Introduction
GENIVAR Inc. (GENIVAR) has been retained to conduct an assessment of Natural Heritage Features as
part of a Schedule B Class Environmental Assessment for the re-routing of three sanitary sewers in the
City of Pickering. The natural environment surveys focused on an area that can be described as lands
within the utility corridor north of Finch Avenue, bounded by Dixie Road to the west and Liverpool Road to
the east. This land consists of Part of Lots 22, 23, 24 and 25, Concession 2, City of Pickering, Regional
Municipality of Durham and is herein referred to as the “Study Area”. Refer to Figure 1 for location
details.
This study is being conducted to determine the presence and extent of natural heritage features and
associated constraints on the potential sanitary sewer routes. The sanitary sewers on Abbey Road,
Cedarwood Court and Wildrose Crescent, which are currently connected to the existing Southeast
Collector Trunk Sewer, are to be rerouted to the local sewerage system through means of another local
sewer that ultimately enters the Finch Liverpool Sewage Pumping Station (SPS). Two alternative routes
have been proposed for the Wildrose Crescent sewer, four for Cedarwood Court and two for Abbey Road
(refer to Figure 2).
The identification and description of natural features on and adjacent to the Study Area is necessary in
order to assess the potential environmental impact of the development and to provide suggestions for the
minimization and/or mitigation of these impacts. This report provides a description of the existing
conditions within the Study Area with a focus on the terrestrial and aquatic environment and includes
descriptions of natural features on and adjacent to the Study Area, as determined through consultation
with relevant authorities, reviews of secondary source information and direct observation during site visits.
Also included is an assessment of potential impacts associated with the alternative alignments and
recommendations to mitigate these impacts.
2.
Environmental Policy Context
2.1
Provincial Policy Statement
The Provincial Policy Statement (OMMAH, 2005) is a planning document that provides a framework for,
and governs development within the Province of Ontario. In order to preserve various ecological
resources deemed significant in the Province, development lands must be assessed for the presence of
Natural Heritage Features prior to construction. These Natural Heritage Features (listed below) are both
defined and afforded protection under the PPS. Linkages between Heritage Features, Surface Water and
Groundwater Features are also recognized and afforded similar protection under the policy. Section 2.1 of
the PPS also requires that the diversity and connectivity of all Natural Heritage Features and the longterm ecological function of Natural Heritage Systems be maintained, restored or improved where
possible.
Under the PPS (OMMAH, 2005), development or site alteration is prohibited within the significant habitat
of endangered or threatened species, or within any fish habitat, but may be allowed adjacent to these
features. Development may occur in or adjacent to Significant Wetlands in defined ecoregion areas, in
Areas of Natural and Scientific Interest (ANSI), and significant wildlife habitat areas, provided no negative
impacts are identified due to the proposed undertaking.
GENIVAR
1
Natural Heritage Features as defined by the PPS (OMMAH, 2005) include:
A)
B)
C)
D)
E)
F)
G)
Fish Habitat;
Significant Areas of Natural and Scientific Interest (ANSI);
Significant Habitat of Endangered and Threatened Species;
Significant Wetlands;
Significant Wildlife Habitat;
Significant Woodlands south and east of the Canadian Shield; and
Significant Valleylands south and east of the Canadian Shield.
2.2
Environmental Assessment Act
The Ontario Environmental Assessment Act, R.S.O., 1990 (the EA Act) requires that projects
corresponding to a given class of undertakings (e.g. municipal road, transit, water and wastewater
projects) follow an approved Class Environmental Assessment (Class EA) process. Municipal projects are
classified as Schedule A or A+, Schedule B, or Schedule C, based on their potential for environmental
impacts. Schedule C Class EAs have the greatest potential for environmental impacts.
Regardless of classification, each Class EA must consist of the following:





a description of the purpose of the undertaking;
a description of, and a statement of, the rationale for the undertaking, the alternative methods of
carrying out the undertaking, and the alternatives to the undertaking;
a description of:
 the environment that will be affected or that might reasonably be expected to be affected,
directly or indirectly,
 the effects that will be caused or that might reasonably be expected to be caused to the
environment, and
 the actions necessary or that may reasonably be expected to be necessary to prevent,
change, mitigate or remedy the effects upon or the effects that might reasonably be
expected upon the environment, by the undertaking, the alternative methods of carrying
out the undertaking and the alternatives to the undertaking;
an evaluation of the advantages and disadvantages to the environment of the undertaking, the
alternative methods of carrying out the undertaking and the alternatives to the undertaking; and
a description of any consultation about the undertaking by the proponent and the results of the
consultation. 1996, c. 27, s. 3.
This report focuses on a description of the environment, the impacts that may occur as a result of the
proposed development, and the actions necessary to prevent, change, mitigate or remedy these potential
impacts.
2.3
Conservation Authorities Act
The Conservation Authorities Act gives individual conservation authorities the power to regulate
development and activities in, or adjacent to, river or stream valleys, Great Lakes and large inland lakes
and shorelines, watercourses, hazardous lands and wetlands. Regulations made under the Conservation
Authorities Act specify the Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and
Watercourses Regulations managed by individual Conservation Authorities. These regulations apply to
GENIVAR
2
lands within river or stream valleys, flood plains, wetlands, watercourses, lakes, hazardous lands or lands
within 120 m of a Provincially Significant Wetland or wetlands greater than 2 hectares, or lands within
30 m of non-provincially significant wetlands. Development or site alteration within these regulated areas
may be permitted provided development is conducted in accordance with existing policies.
The Study Area is within the Toronto Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) jurisdiction. All work must be
conducted to meet TRCA requirements.
3.
Agency Consultation
A request for information was submitted to the OMNR and TRCA prior to conducting the field visits to
ensure natural heritage features and species at risk with the potential to be within the Study Area were
identified. A copy of email correspondence from the regulatory agencies is provided in Appendix A.
4.
Desktop Review
The study area is located within the north end of the City of Pickering and is bordered by Dixie Road to
the west, Liverpool Road to the east, and residential properties to the north and south (refer to Figure 1).
A review of available information pertaining to the presence of Natural Heritage Features, including
species at risk, was conducted for the general area. The following information resources and documents
were utilized over the course of the desktop review and during the preparation of this report. References
are provided in the Literature Cited section.













Aerial Photographs and Satellite Images;
Atlas of Mammals (Dobbyn, 1994);
Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Ontario (Bird Studies Canada, 2006);
City of Pickering Official Plan (2010);
Conservation Authority Act, Ontario Regulation 166/06 Toronto and Region Conservation
Authority (TRCA);
Endangered Species Act, 2007 (Government of Ontario (Ontario), 2007);
Land Information Ontario (LIO) Mapping Resources (OMNR, 2010a);
Natural Heritage Information Centre (NHIC) Mapping and Databases (OMNR, 2010b);
Natural Heritage Reference Manual for Natural Heritage Policies of the Provincial Policy
Statement, 2005 (OMNR, 2010c);
Durham Regional Official Plan (2008);
Southeast Collector Trunk Sewer Environmental Assessment: Natural Environment Impact
Assessment of the Preferred Method Report (AECOM, 2009);
Species at Risk in Ontario (SARO) list (Government of Ontario, 2013); and,
TRCA 2013 Aquatic Species at Risk Distribution Map (Fisheries and Oceans Canada, 2012).
GENIVAR
3
4.1
Study Area Background Information
4.1.1
Species of Conservation Concern
As part of a desktop review, a search of the OMNR Natural Heritage Information Centre (NHIC) database
(2010b) was conducted to determine the existence and approximate location of recorded occurrences of
species at risk in the study area. Nine one square kilometer (1 km2) quadrats (17PJ55_15-17,
17PJ55_25-27, and 17PJ55_35-37) surrounding the Study Area were checked to ensure potential
species at risk were accounted for during field surveys. The search revealed six species of conservation
concern (Table 1). Of these six records, one is listed as a species of Special Concern (SC) and one is
listed as Endangered (END) on the SARO (Ontario, 2013) and Committee on the Status of Endangered
Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) Lists. Refer to Appendix B for complete NHIC records for these species.
Table 1
NHIC Records for Species of Conservation Concern
Species Name
Scientific Name
GRank1
Global
SRank1
Provincial
COSEWIC2
Canada
SARO3
Ontario
Burning Bush
Euonymus atropurpureus
G5
S3
-
-
Clamp-tipped Emerald
Somatochlora tenebrosa
G5
S2S3
-
-
Eastern Ribbonsnake
Thamnophis sauritus
G5
S3
SC
SC
Green-striped Darner
Aeshna verticalis
G5
S3
-
-
Lurking Leskea
Plagiothecium latebricola
G3G4
S2
-
-
Redside Dace
Clinostomus elongatus
G3G4
S2
END
END
1
Source: Nature Conservancy Ranking (NHIC, 2010). 1 - Critically Imperiled, 2 - Imperiled, 3 - Vulnerable,
4 - Apparently Secure, 5 - Secure, G - Global Level, S - Sub-national Rank (Ontario), ? – Rank Uncertain, X – Presumed Extirpated,
NA – Conservation Status Rank is Not Applicable at this level.
2
3
Source: Species at Risk Public Registry (SARA, 2010) COSEWIC Status and Source: Species at Risk in Ontario List (SARO,
2010). EXP – Extirpated, END – Endangered, THR – Threatened, SC – Special concern, ‘-‘ - Not listed.
In addition to a review of the NHIC database, the OMNR and TRCA were contacted for information
pertaining to species at risk in the general area (Appendix A). The OMNR did not identify the presence of
species at risk within the Study Area. TRCA records indicated that Butternut (Juglans cinerea) have been
observed within the Whitevale Corridor ESA, Nu West Ravine and the wooded areas west of Dixie Road.
Two of these occurrences are depicted on Figure 2. The closest recorded Butternut is approximately
110 m west of the Wildrose Crescent Alternative A. Twelve occurrences for Eastern Meadowlark
(Sturnella magna) exist within the general area, but were concentrated within the utility corridor in the
Rouge-Duffins Wildlife Corridor approximately 550 m north of the Study Area and do not appear on
Figure 2. In addition, a single Eastern Wood-pewee (Contopus virens) was documented within the
Whitevale Corridor ESA well outside of the Study Area.
The Distribution of Fish Species at Risk maps for the TRCA provide information regarding Aquatic
Species at Risk (SAR) and the level of protection afforded to, or proposed, for watercourses within the
watershed under the Species at Risk Act. A review of these maps indicated that the watercourses within
the Study Area do not support aquatic SAR, including fish and mussel species, or their habitat (Fisheries
and Oceans Canada, 2012).
GENIVAR
4
As part of the Southeast Collector (SEC) Trunk Sewer Environmental Assessment (EA), AECOM
completed a Natural Environment Impact Assessment for the preferred alternative (2009). A portion of the
preferred alternative runs through the current Study Area. Results of the AECOM study were reviewed
and considered during the preparation of this report. Specific details that are relevant to the current study
are addressed within Section 6 of this report.
4.1.2
Natural Heritage Features
A background search of the OMNR NHIC database, Regional and Municipal Official Plans, and AECOM
Natural Environment Final Report (2009) was conducted to determine if there are known ANSI’s, Fish
Habitat, Significant Wetlands, Significant Woodlands, Significant Wildlife Habitat, Wildlife Concentration
Areas, or Protected Areas on or within 120 m of the Study Area. Natural Heritage Features are depicted
on Figure 2, and include three watercourses (WC1, WC2 and WC3), two wetlands (WE1 and WE2), The
Whitevale Corridor Environmentally Sensitive Area (ESA), a TRCA Conservation Area and areas of
natural cover, including woodlands and thickets.
5.
Site Information
5.1
Site Investigation
Site visits were conducted on May 16, June 10, and July 3, 2013 to confirm the presence of natural
heritage features, map vegetation and to determine general characteristics of the Study Area. Emphasis
during the site visits was on documentation of breeding birds, dominant vascular plants and natural
features within the vicinity of the alternative routes. Breeding bird surveys were completed on all three site
visits, while vegetation surveys were completed on May 16 and July 3, 2013. Site visit details are
provided in Table 2.
Table 2
Details of Site Visits
Date
Time / Duration
Weather Conditions
May 16, 2013
7:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m.
Clear skies, no precipitation with little to no wind and a
temperature of ± 12 °C
June 10, 2013
7:30 a.m. to 10:00 a.m.
Overcast, ± 15 °C, gentle breeze, light rain beginning near
the end of survey
July 3, 2013
7:30 a.m. to 1:35 p.m.
Overcast, ± 20 °C, gentle breeze, no trace of precipitation;
sun with light cloud cover and 24 °C at the end of the site
visit
Prior to the site visit a review of background information, satellite images and topographic maps was
conducted to identify potential natural heritage features and species of conservation concern. During the
site visit photographs of the site were taken and observations of wildlife, vegetation or natural features
were recorded. A list of incidental species observed during the site visit can be found in Appendix C.
GENIVAR
5
5.2
Study Area Description
The Study Area encompasses the utility corridor between Dixie Road and Liverpool Road, approximately
500 meters north of Finch Avenue. Several alternate routes extend along adjacent residential streets
within the immediate vicinity, including Dixie Road, Maple Gate Road and Liverpool Road. The Study
Area is located within a designated Living Area of the Urban System outlined in Schedule A Map A4 of
the Durham Region Official Plan (2008). Within this area, wooded areas, wetlands and watercourses
have been identified as Key Natural Heritage Features and Hydrologic Features (Schedule B Map B1d;
Durham, 2008). The Study Area is not located in the Greenbelt or Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan
Areas. Schedules do not specifically identify significant woodlands, wetlands or valleylands within the
Region.
At the municipal level (City of Pickering), the utility corridor within the Study Area has been identified as a
Potential Mixed-Use Area, while the wooded areas within Nu West Ravine have been designated as
Natural Areas within the Open Space System (Schedule I – Land Use Structure; City of Pickering, 2010).
Schedule III of the Official Plan identifies provincially significant wetlands, environmentally significant
areas, shorelines and stream corridors, wildlife corridors, and ANSIs; whereas forests, fields and
hedgerows are identified on Map 4 of the Official Plan. Specifically, portions of the Nu West Ravine are
designated as a ‘shorelines and stream corridor’ and the Whitevale Corridor is identified as an
Environmentally Significant Area on Schedule III of the Official Plan (City of Pickering, 2010). In addition,
treed areas within the utility corridor have been identified as ‘forest’ on Map 4 of the Official Plan, while
surrounding manicured lawn areas have been designated as ‘fields’.
5.2.1
Field Observations
The utility corridor is located within a low density single-family home residential area, and has been
impacted by regular disturbance for utility maintenance and construction, as well as recreational use. Two
active construction sites associated with the new Southeast Collector (SEC) Sanitary Sewer are present
within the utility corridor, one at the southwest corner of the Study Area, adjacent to Dixie Road, and the
other immediately east of the southern tip of wetland WE2. Unmaintained dirt trails and foot paths are
present within the utility corridor particularly within the vicinity of Liverpool Road and the Nu West Ravine.
Between Maple Gate Road and watercourse WC3, local residents have created gardens and sitting areas
within the northern extent of the utility corridor, adjacent to their properties. Occasional ornamental and
shade trees are also present within this part of the corridor and would likely be impacted by the proposed
Cedarwood Court Alternative B. Garbage and yard waste was observed in several areas with the utility
corridor.
Available mapping indicates that three watercourses exist within the Study Area, although stream
channels have been modified and routed underground in some areas to accommodate development
within the residential areas. Two wetlands (WE1 and WE2) were identified during the field investigation.
Wetland boundaries depicted on Figure 2 are based on aerial imagery and verification of wetland
vegetation in the field, with the exception of the wetland unit within the Nu West Ravine which was
identified by AECOM (2009). These natural heritage features are discussed in more detail within
Section 6 of this report.
Vegetation within the utility corridor consists of field, thicket and woodland vegetation types. Regular
mowing has prevented woody plants from becoming established within open areas. Various grasses and
plants commonly found in disturbed areas and fields dominated these areas, and included White Clover
GENIVAR
6
(Trifolium repens), Red Clover (Trifolium pratense), Cow Vetch (Vicia cracca), Common Plantain
(Plantago major), and Bladder Campion (Silene latifolia). Stands of mature trees, approximately 20 m
wide existed between the northern and southern hydro lines on either side of Maple Gate Road. East of
Maple Gate Road the stand is dominated by deciduous species including Trembling Aspen (Populus
tremuloides), Balsam Poplar (Populus balsamifera), White Birch (Betula papyrifera), and Manitoba Maple
(Acer negundo), although occasional Eastern White Pine (Pinus strobus), Red Pine (Pinus resinosa) and
Eastern White Cedar (Thuja occidentalis) were also present. Pin Cherry (Prunus pensylvanica), Common
Buckthorn (Rhamnus cathartica), Red Raspberry (Rubus idaeus) and Alternate-leaved Dogwood (Cornus
alternifolia) were the most common understory species in this area. To the west, the stand composition
was similar; however, Sugar Maple (Acer saccharum) and Red Oak (Quercus rubra) were more common
within the canopy.
Areas of early successional growth existed beneath the southern hydro line. Within the western extent of
the Study Area, Balsam Poplar and Trembling Aspen seedlings were common within the mixed meadow,
whereas in the east, dense thickets of Staghorn Sumac (Rhus typhina), White Swallow-wort (Cynanchum
rossicum), Wild Grape (Vitis sp.), Thistle species (Cirsium sp.), and Common Blackberry (Rubus
allegheniensis) were well established. Trembling Aspen seedlings, Chokecherry (Prunus virginiana),
Maple-leaved Viburnum (Viburnum acerifolium), Tartarian Honeysuckle (Lonicera tatarica), were also
present within the thickets and immediately south of the line of mature trees. Pockets of poor drainage
were noted within the thickets along the Cedarwood Court Alternatives A and D. Past operation of heavyequipment within this area has left deep ruts within the soft soil. In addition to the upland shrubs and trees
listed above, species commonly associated with poorly drained soils were also observed in this area and
included Missouri Willow (Salix eriocephala), Wild Mint (Mentha arvensis), Blue Vervain (Verbena
hastata) and Common Boneset (Eupatorium perfoliatum).
The woodland within the Nu West Ravine is composed of several forest types, which are described using
Ecological Land Classification (ELC) (Lee et al., 2008) as Sugar Maple – Hemlock Mixed Forest
(FOM6-1), Dry-Fresh White Cedar – Poplar Mixed Forest (FOM4-2) and Dry-Fresh Sugar Maple – Oak
Deciduous Forest (FOD5-3) (AECOM, 2009). The latter forest type is closest to the utility corridor and is
dominated by Sugar Maple and Red Oak with occasional White Birch, Eastern White Pine, Basswood
(Tilia americana), Black Cherry (Prunus serotina) and White Ash (Fraxinus americana). The understory
was relatively sparse but occasional Witch-hazel (Hamamelis virginiana), Pin Cherry, and Maple-leaved
Viburnum were noted. A variety of herbaceous plants, including White Trillium (Trillium grandiflorum), Red
Trillium (Trillium erectum), Red Baneberry (Actaea rubra), Broad-leaved Toothwort (Cardamine diphylla),
Shinleaf (Pyrola elliptica), Canada Mayflower (Maianthemum canadensis), and False Solomon’s Seal
(Maianthemum racemosum) made up the patchy ground cover.
Native plant diversity within the thickets, meadows and forest edges is being threatened by the spread of
the highly invasive White Swallow-wort (also known as Strangling Dog Vine) and Garlic Mustard (Alliaria
petiolata). Large infestations of White Swallow-wort were noted along the northern perimeter of the
wooded area east of Dixie Road, and within the sumac thickets in the vicinity of the Cedarwood Court
Alternatives A and D. White Swallow-wort is a herbaceous perennial vine that can grow from one to two
meters in height by twining on to trees and other plants, and can form dense patches that strangle other
plants and small trees (Pridham and Irvine, 2008).
GENIVAR
7
6.
Assessment of Natural Heritage Features
The following sections outline the Natural Heritage Features identified within the Study Area during the
site investigation and discuss the potential for species at risk (SAR) based on available habitat and field
observations.
6.1
Fish Habitat
Fish habitat as defined by the Fisheries Act, c. F-14 includes the spawning grounds and nursery, rearing,
food supply and migration areas on which fish depend directly or indirectly in order to carry out their life
processes. The Act also includes a broader definition of fish as shellfish, crustaceans, and marine
mammals at all stages of their life cycles.
The Study Area exists within the northeast portion of the Frenchmen’s Bay Watershed near the western
boundary of West Duffins Creek Watershed. Land within the Study Area drains into Pine Creek, which
outlets into Frenchmen’s Bay approximately 3 km to the south. Surrounding land use is primarily
residential subdivisions, with pockets of natural cover within the headwater areas. Three watercourses,
WC1, WC2 and WC3 were identified on existing mapping for the Study Area and were surveyed during
the field investigation. These watercourses have been identified as warmwater watercourses, but have
not been classified as ephemeral, intermittent or permanent (AECOM, 2009). Fish were not observed
during the site investigation; however, the watercourses may provide habitat for fish at points where flows
are above ground.
According to available mapping, the east-west portion of WC1 at the southern boundary of the utility
corridor appears to run underground, as it was not observed at the Dixie Road crossing, or within the
utility corridor between Dixie Road and the confluence with WC2. A culvert outlet was observed at the
northwest corner of the woodland east of Dixie Road (Image 1, Appendix D). If present, discharge from
this culvert would flow into an artificial drainage channel consisting of a corrugated metal trough within an
artificial trench that runs downslope, ending adjacent to WC2 (Image 2, Appendix D). There was no water
observed within the culvert outlet, or the trough at the time of the May and July site visits. This location
was also surveyed by AECOM in 2005 and was identified as survey location SEC62. Observations were
as follows: “Fish community and fish habitat assessments were not conducted at SEC62 because the
streambed was dry in the spring of 2005 when flows would be expected. The condition of the drainage
feature at this site indicated infrequent flow of short duration and intensity when it flows. The site consists
of a drainage outflow from a culvert flowing beneath the road. For these reasons this feature is
considered relatively insensitive to environmental change” (AECOM, 2009). While the exact location of
Watercourse WC1 is unclear, it would appear that it intersects with the proposed Wildrose Crescent
Alternative A at a point below ground. Impacts to the watercourse are unlikely provided existing
infrastructure remains intact and appropriate mitigation measures are adopted to ensure disturbed soils
and/or sediment do not enter the artificial channel or move downslope to WC2 which is approximately
85 m east of Wildrose Crescent Alternative A.
Within the Study Area, WC2 originates at a concrete culvert (Image 3, Appendix D) approximately 4 m
south of the Wildrose Crescent Alternative B, and flows south to the southern edge of the utility corridor
where it disappears into a large grate (Image 4, Appendix D) leading to an underground conveyance
through the residential area. Within the utility corridor, WC2 follows a sinuous, poorly-defined channel
through thicket swamp, swamp and meadow marsh wetland habitats (Image 5, Appendix D). Although
GENIVAR
8
unclear from existing mapping, WC2 likely originates within or beyond the residential area to the north.
Impacts to WC2 as a result of Wildrose Crescent Alternative B are most likely to arise due to the potential
for the movement of sediments into the above-ground portion of the watercourse and surrounding
wetland areas. This watercourse was not surveyed by AECOM during the 2005 survey period and
additional details were not provided in the 2009 final report.
Within the Study Area Watercourse WC3 is a permanent watercourse (Image 6, Appendix D) regulated by
the TRCA (refer to Figure 2) that flows above ground until it reaches the grounds of Maple Ridge Public
School, where it is redirected below ground through the neighbouring residential area. As with WC2, lowlying areas surrounding WC3 were identified by AECOM and GENIVAR as wetland habitat, including
swamp, meadow marsh and marsh habitat. Watercourse WC3 is approximately 75 m from Cedarwood
Court Alternative A, and 88 m from Abbey Road Alternative A. Given the size of the existing buffers,
direct impacts to WC3 are not anticipated. A survey of WC3 was completed by AECOM in 2005 at a site
identified as SEC61 where the watercourse intersects with Dixie Road, north of the Study Area. The
following was reported: “Fish community and fish habitat assessments were not conducted at SEC61
because the streambed was dry in the spring of 2005 when flows would be expected. The drainage
feature at this site contains high sediment deposition and consists of a poorly defined channel indicating
infrequent flow of short duration and intensity when it flows. For these reasons this feature is considered
relatively insensitive to environmental change” (AECOM, 2009).
6.2
Significant Areas of Natural and Scientific Interest
Significant Areas of Natural and Scientific Interest (ANSI) are defined as areas of land and water
containing natural landscapes or features that have been identified as having life science or earth science
values related to protection, scientific study or education.
The Natural Heritage Information Centre (NHIC) database was searched for the presence of ANSIs on or
within 120 m of the Study Area. ANSIs were not listed on or within 120 m of the Study Area. The
Whitevale Corridor Environmentally Significant Area (ESA) exists on the east side of Liverpool Road;
approximately 175 m northeast of the Study Area (refer to Figure 2). There is no development proposed
within this locally significant ESA.
6.3
Significant Habitat of Endangered or Threatened Species
The PPS (OMMAH, 2005) defines the significant habitat of endangered or threatened species as the
habitat, as approved by the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (OMNR), that is necessary for the
maintenance, survival and/or the recovery of a naturally occurring or reintroduced population of
endangered or threatened species, and where those areas of occurrences are occupied or habitually
occupied by the species during all or any part(s) of their life cycle. The OMNR is mandated to ensure
accurate database information for the identification, listing and conduct of ongoing assessments for
significant endangered species and their related habitats.
The species identified in Subsection 4.1.1 of the report were given emphasis for their potential presence
during the field investigation. Two threatened species, not previously recorded within the Study Area,
were observed during the 2013 field investigation. A single Eastern Meadowlark was observed during the
June 10 and July 3, 2013 site visits in the manicured lawn area east of Maple Gate Drive (refer to Figure
2). Approximate UTM co-ordinates for the sighting are: 17T 0652420 m E 4856867 m N (NAD 83). In
addition, a Barn Swallow in flight was observed during the May 17, 2013 site visit, but it was determined
GENIVAR
9
that due to the lack of suitable nesting habitat the species is unlikely to be using the Study Area. With the
exception of the previously identified Butternut, there were no other endangered or threatened species
observed during the 2013 site investigation. The watercourses within the Study Area have been identified
as warmwater systems, and are not consistent with Redside Dace habitat. Furthermore, available TRCA
mapping, and OMNR correspondence indicate that this species is not a concern for the present
development.
6.4
6.4.1
Biophysical Inventories/Observations
Bird Populations
The Atlas of the Breeding Birds of Ontario was consulted to determine if there were any rare or
endangered species known to be present within the Study Area. The Atlas uses 100 km by 100 km
blocks, then further to 10 km by 10 km squares to compartmentalize geographical areas. The Study Area
lies within the 10 km by 10 km square identified as 17PJ55. Species names as well as their associated
habitat potential on the Study Area are listed in Table 3. These species and their potential habitat were
given special consideration during the site visit.
Table 3
Species Name
Bird Species at Risk Habitat Potential and Field Observations
(SARO designation: END = Endangered; THR = Threatened; SC = Special Concern)
SARO
Habitat Description1
Study Area
Habitat
Potential
Field Observations
Barn Swallow
THR
Barn Swallows often live in close association
with humans, building their cup-shaped mud
nests almost exclusively on human-made
structures such as open barns, under bridges
and in culverts. This species forages over a
wide area.
Moderate
Single bird observed
flying over Study
Area. No suitable
nesting habitat
identified within
Study Area.
Bobolink
THR
The species builds their nests on the ground in
dense grasses, such as those found in hay
fields, tallgrass prairies and open meadows.
Moderate
Species not
observed. Potential
for suitable habitat if
fields were no longer
mowed.
SC
The species is found in a variety of forest types,
but is most abundant in wet, mixed deciduousconiferous forests with a well-developed shrub
layer. Also found in riparian shrub forests.
Moderate
Species not
observed. Some
suitable habitat is
present northeast of
the Study Area.
THR
The species feeds in flocks around water
bodies due to the large amount of insects
present. Nesting occurs in large, hollow trees
or in the chimneys of houses in urban and rural
areas.
Low
Species not
observed. Suitable
habitat not present
within Study Area.
SC
The species nests in areas with little to no
ground vegetation, such as logged or burnedover areas, forest clearings, rock barrens, etc.
Low
Species not
observed. Suitable
habitat not present
within Study Area.
The species prefers native grasslands, pastures
and savannahs though will use a variety of
other grassland habitats such as hayfields,
weedy meadows, etc.
High
Single bird observed
on two occasions in
centre of study area.
Possibly nesting
here.
Canada Warbler
Chimney Swift
Common
Nighthawk
Eastern
Meadowlark
GENIVAR
THR
10
Species Name
SARO
Study Area
Habitat
Potential
Field Observations
Eastern Whippoor-will
THR
The Eastern Whip-poor-will is usually found in
areas with a mix of open and forested areas,
such as savannahs, open woodlands or
openings in more mature, deciduous,
coniferous and mixed forests.
Low
Species not
observed. Suitable
habitat not present
within Study Area.
Least Bittern
THR
In Ontario, the Least Bittern is found in a variety
of wetland habitats, but strongly prefers cattail
marshes with a mix of open pools and
channels.
Low
Species not
observed. Suitable
habitat not present
within Study Area.
Louisiana
Waterthrush
SC
The species typically nests along pristine,
headwater streams associated with large tracts
of mature forest. It may also be found in heavily
wooded deciduous swamps with large areas of
open water.
Low
Species not
observed. Suitable
habitat not present
within Study Area.
Red-headed
Woodpecker
SC
The species lives in open woodlands and
woodland edges, especially in oak savannah
and riparian forest, where dead trees are used
for nesting and perching.
Low
Species not
observed. Suitable
habitat not present
within Study Area.
1
Source: COSEWIC reports and/or Species at Risk in Ontario (SARO) List
6.4.1.1
Survey Methodology
Breeding bird surveys were designed and completed based on recommendations given by the Forest Bird
Monitoring Protocol (FBMP) and the Ontario Breeding Bird Atlas (OBBA). Site visits were conducted on
May 16, 2013, June 10, 2013 and July 3, 2013. In accordance with the FBMP, one site visit was
completed within the window of May 24 - June 17, and a second site visit was completed within the
window of June 13 – July 3, with at least 6 days between visits. The breeding bird surveys were
completed before 5 hours after sunrise, in accordance with the OBBA.
On each site visit, an active survey of the area was carried out. This involved looking and listening for
birds while moving between the different vegetation types within the Study Area, including mowed grass,
mixed woodland, shrubby areas, and wetlands. Breeding evidence was noted where applicable. A total of
8 person hours was dedicated to breeding bird surveys.
6.4.1.2
Survey Results
A cumulative total of 44 bird species were seen within the Study Area over the three survey periods. Out
of these species, four were considered to be migrants – Chestnut-sided Warbler (Setophaga
pensylvanica), Nashville Warbler (Oreothlypis ruficapilla), Palm Warbler (Setophaga palmarum), and
Yellow-rumped Warbler (Setophaga coronata). The remaining 40 species were considered to breed in the
area. Breeding evidence was noted during each survey, using the same criteria as the Ontario Breeding
Bird Atlas. Breeding was “Confirmed” for seven species, considered “Probable” for 15 species, and
considered “Possible” for 13 species. Therefore, breeding evidence was noted for 35 total species within
the Study Area (refer to Appendix C).
As discussed in Subsection 6.3, there were two species observed within the Study Area that are
provincially listed species at risk. An Eastern Meadowlark was observed in the same area on two
separate survey dates (June 10 and July 3, 2013) and may be breeding there. The individual was
GENIVAR
11
observed approximately 20 meters east of Maple Gate Road between the power lines (refer to Figure 2).
Vegetation in this area consisted of various grasses and occasional forbs, with an average height of
approximately 15 – 20 cm (Image 7, Appendix D). Grass within this area appears to be mowed several
times a year and is not consistent with typical Eastern Meadowlark habitat. A single Barn Swallow was
noted flying over the Study Area on May 16, 2013. Barn Swallows were not seen on subsequent visits
and it is unlikely that they are nesting in the area.
A territorial male Eastern Wood-pewee (Contopus virens) was observed within the Nu West Ravine
approximately 180 m north of the utility corridor (refer to Figure 2). Eastern Wood-pewee isn’t currently
listed provincially; however it was assessed by the Committee on the Status of Species at Risk in Ontario
(COSSARO) in January 2013 to determine whether it should be listed on the SARO List (Government of
Ontario, 2013). At the time of publication of this report, the species had not been listed as at-risk on the
SARO List. The COSSARO assessment was spurred by significant declines in population abundance,
particularly over the past 10 years. Population declines in Eastern Wood-pewee are not well understood
but are thought to be linked to habitat loss and degradation in their wintering grounds, and/or changes in
the availability of insect prey. This species prefers mature deciduous forests, such as those located in the
Nu West Ravine, and is unlikely to be impacted by the proposed development.
Impacts to breeding birds, including Eastern Meadowlark, can be mitigated by conducting vegetation
removal outside of the breeding bird window between April 1 and July 31. Impact assessment and
mitigation measures are discussed in more detail in Section 8 of this report.
6.4.2
Wildlife
Despite the disturbed nature of the Study Area a review of available resources suggests that the following
mammalian species at risk have the potential to be in the general area: Little Myotis (formerly Little Brown
Bat) (Myotis lucifugus) and Northern Myotis (formerly Northern Long-eared Bat) (Myotis septentrionalis).
An assessment of the habitat potential for these species within the Study Area is provided in Table 4,
along with field observations.
Table 4
Species Name
Mammal Species at Risk Habitat Potential and Field Observations
(SARO designation: END = Endangered; THR = Threatened; SC = Special Concern)
SARO
Study Area
Habitat
Potential
Field Observations
Little Myotis
END
During the summer, this species roosts in
trees, abandoned buildings, attics, and barns
close to water. This species overwinters in
large groups in warm, moist caves or
abandoned mines.
Low
Species not
observed. Suitable
habitat may be
the Study Area.
Northern Myotis
END
The species builds their nests on the ground in
dense grasses, such as those found in hay
fields, tallgrass prairies and open meadows.
Low
Species not
observed. Suitable
habitat may be
the Study Area.
1
Source: COSEWIC reports and/or Species at Risk in Ontario (SARO) List
Visual observations of area wildlife were recorded during the site investigation. Wildlife observations were
based on incidental contact, scat evidence, and tracks, and were consistent with species known to
occupy this area. There were no mammalian species at risk or their habitat identified during the site
GENIVAR
12
investigation; however, suitable habitat for Little Myotis and Northern Myotis may exist within the wooded
areas northeast of the Study Area. Species observed during the site investigation are common in this part
of the province, and included Eastern Gray Squirrel (Sciurus carolinensis), Eastern Chipmunk (Tamias
striatus), Eastern Cottontail (Sylvilagus floridanus), and Raccoon (Procyon lotor). Incidental wildlife
observations are provided in Appendix C.
6.4.3
Herpetofauna
Due to the highly disturbed nature of the Study Area, suitable habitat for amphibian and reptile species is
thought to be restricted to the Nu West Ravine, and wetlands WE1 and WE2. A review of available
resources suggests that the following species at risk have the potential to be in the area, given the
available habitat: Eastern Ribbon Snake (Thamnophis sauritus) and Milksnake (Lampropeltis triangulum).
Results of amphibian surveys and background reviews reported in the Natural Environment Report for the
Collector Trunk Sewer Environmental Assessment (AECOM, 2009) do not provide additional information
about amphibian populations within the Study Area.
During the site investigation, Eastern Garter Snake (Thamnophis sirtalis sirtalis), Green Frog (Rana
clamitans) and Northern Leopard Frog (Rana pipiens) were observed in wetland WE2 along the banks of
watercourse WC3. There were no herptile species at risk observed during the site investigation. Incidental
observations are provided in Appendix C.
6.5
Significant Wetlands
Wetlands are defined in the PPS (OMMAH, 2005) as lands that are seasonally or permanently covered
by shallow water, as well as lands where the water table is close to or at the surface. There are four major
wetland types; which are classified as swamps, marshes, bogs, and fens. A significant wetland is defined
as an area identified as provincially significant by the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources using
evaluation procedures established by the province, as amended from time to time (OMMAH, 2005).
Satellite photographs and available mapping resources for the Study Area and surrounding area were
reviewed for the presence of wetlands. A review of the OMNR NHIC database (2010b) and Land
Information Ontario (LIO) (OMNR, 2010a) was carried out to determine the significance of wetlands on or
adjacent to the Site. The information sources consulted during the preparation of this report did not
identify significant wetlands on or within 120 m of the Study Area. Wetlands WE1 and WE2 are
unevaluated wetlands that do not appear on regional or local mapping.
Wetland WE1 flanks watercourse WC2 and is composed of several different types of wetland units. Using
ELC (Lee et al., 2008), these areas can be described as Willow Deciduous Thicket Swamp (SWT2-2),
Poplar – Conifer Mixed Swamp (SWM3-2) and Mixed Meadow Marsh (MAM2) wetland units. Common
species in this area include Eastern White Cedar (Thuja occidentalis), Black Ash (Fraxinus nigra), Balsam
Poplar, Willow species (Salix sp.), Red-Osier Dogwood (Cornus stolonifera), Narrow-leaved Cattail
(Typha angustifolia), Spotted Jewel-weed (Impatiens capensis), Sensitive Fern (Onoclea sensibilis),
Horsetail species (Equisetum sp.) and various graminoids.
Wetland WE2 occupies low-lying areas surrounding watercourse WC3. Within the Nu West Ravine the
wetland has been identified as a Yellow Birch Organic Deciduous Swamp (SWD7-2) (AECOM, 2009).
Within the hydro corridor, the wetland area consists of Mixed Meadow Marsh (MAM2), and Graminoid
Shallow Marsh type wetland units (MAS2). Common species include Reed Canaray Grass (Phalaris
GENIVAR
13
arundinacea), Cattail species (Typha sp.), Goldernrod species (Solidago sp.), various graminoids and
occasional willow shrubs.
6.6
Significant Wildlife Habitat
Wildlife habitat is defined as areas where plants, animals, and other organisms live and find adequate
amounts of food, water, shelter, and space needed to sustain their populations. Specific wildlife habitats
of concern may include areas where species concentrate at a vulnerable point in their annual life cycle;
and areas which are important to migratory or non-migratory species (OMMAH, 2005).
Wildlife habitat is referred to as significant if it is ecologically important in terms of features, functions,
representation or amount, and contributing to the quality and diversity of an identifiable geographic area
or Natural Heritage System (OMMAH, 2005).
Guidelines and criteria for the identification of significant wildlife habitat are detailed in the Significant
Wildlife Habitat Technical Guide and Decision Support System (OMNR, 2000), and the Natural Heritage
Reference Manual (OMNR, 2010c). Significant wildlife habitat is described under four main categories:




Seasonal concentrations of animals,
Rare vegetation communities or specialized habitats for wildlife,
Wildlife movement corridors, and
Habitats of species of conservation concern.
The West Duffins Creek valley was identified by AECOM as an area of higher quality wildlife habitat
(2009). This area links several important wildlife habitats, including the Rouge-Duffins Wildlife Corridor
(City of Pickering, 2010) and core areas of early successional habitat and high quality mixed forest
habitat. This area is thought to provide habitat for area-sensitive forest birds, and also provides suitable
nesting habitat for several Bank Swallow (Riparia riparia) colonies (AECOM, 2009). Portions of the West
Duffins Creek valley have also been identified as the Whitevale Corridor ESA and a TRCA Conservation
Area. This area of higher quality wildlife habitat is approximately 175 m from the Abbey Road Alternative
A and will not be impacted by the proposed works.
The Rouge-Duffins Wildlife Corridor extends from the West Duffins Creek southwest to the Rouge Park.
Land use north of the corridor is dominated by agriculture, while single-family residential subdivisions
occupy the land to the south. The corridor itself is composed of a variety of vegetation communities,
including cultural, forest, marsh and swamp. The Cherrywood Transformer Station occupies a large tract
of land between Fairport Road and Dixie Road within the approximate middle of the wildlife corridor.
Undeveloped land on the west side of Dixie Road has been identified as part of the Rouge-Duffins
Wildlife Corridor (Pickering, 2010), but there is no development proposed within this area. It is anticipated
that the temporary impacts associated with the proposed development will be restricted to the right-ofway and land on the east side of Dixie Road.
Significant wildlife habitat also includes habitat for species of conservation concern, including special
concern species on the SARO List. Records in the NHIC database indicate that Eastern Ribbonsnake has
been observed in the general area. This species was not observed during the field investigation but the
marsh habitat within wetland WE2 may provide suitable habitat for this species. There is no development
proposed within 65 m of this wetland, and impacts to the species and its habitat are not anticipated.
GENIVAR
14
While not identified as a species at risk, the Eastern Wood-pewee has been identified as a species of
conservation concern following the 2013 assessment by COSSARO, and may appear on the SARO list
following review by the OMNR. This species prefers mature deciduous woodlands, such as those found
within the Nu West Ravine. As there is no development proposed within the woodland, impacts to this
species and its habitat are unlikely to occur, and specific mitigation measures are not deemed necessary.
6.7
Significant Woodlands
Significant Woodlands are defined as treed areas that provide environmental and economic benefits such
as erosion prevention, water retention, and provision of habitat, recreation and the sustainable harvest of
woodland products (PPS 2005). Woodlands include treed areas, woodlots or forested areas and vary in
their level of significance. The identification and assessment of significant woodlands is the responsibility
of the local planning bodies, in this case the City of Pickering, and Regional Municipality of Durham.
Woodland significance is typically determined by evaluating key criteria which relate to woodland size,
ecological function, uncommon woodland species, and economic and social value.
Wooded areas within the Study Area have been identified on Schedule B Map B1d of the Durham
Regional Plan as Key Natural Heritage Features. The Nu West Ravine woodland is considered to be a
significant woodland due to its size (> 12 ha), linkage with the Rouge-Duffins Wildlife Corridor, and its
ecological value to wildlife. Within the utility corridor a line of mature trees approximately 20 m wide exists
between the hydro lines on either side of Maple Gate Road. Vegetation under the northern hydro line has
been managed as manicured lawn, while natural regeneration has been allowed under the southern
hydro line. In this area east of Maple Gate Road, Staghorn Sumac, Hawthorn (Craetagus sp.) and Willow
thickets are dominant, while Balsam Poplar and Trembling Aspen regeneration is more common with the
south end of the hydro corridor west of Maple Gate Road (refer to Appendix C for a complete list of
vegetation within the Study Area). These woodland pockets are less than 2 ha in size and are not
contiguous with larger woodlands to the north. Dogwoods and small willow shrubs flank watercourse
WC3 between Nu West Ravine and the mature trees within the hydro corridor (Image 8, Appendix D), but
do not meet the size and composition criteria used to define woodlands. The mature trees within the
hydro corridor are in excess of 40 m from the significant Nu West Ravine woodland to the north, and as
such, are not considered significant.
There is no development proposed within the significant Nu West Ravine woodland, or the woodland
pocket west of Maple Gate Road. Cedarwood Court potential routes A and D traverse the line of mature
trees and thickets within the utility corridor east of Maple Gate Road. To permit the construction of route A
or D, a 6 m-wide path will have to be cut through the vegetation to allow access by equipment, vehicles
and personnel. An assessment of potential impacts is provided in Section 8, along with recommendations
for mitigation measures to minimize the impact to vegetation, wildlife and birds in this area.
6.8
Significant Valleylands
The PPS (OMMAH, 2005) refers to significant valleylands as “a natural area that occurs in a valley or
other landform depression that has water flowing through or standing for some period of the year”. The
local planning authority is responsible for identifying and evaluating significant valleylands.
A review of the City of Pickering Official Plan (2010) and Durham Regional Plan (2008) was completed to
determine if significant valleylands have been identified within the Study Area. Watercourse WC3 is
regulated by the TRCA and is located within a designated Shoreline and Stream Corridor (Schedule III
GENIVAR
15
Resource Management) in the City of Pickering Official Plan (2010). Stream corridors are recognized as
features of natural significance that have been included in the City’s Resource Protection and
Enhancement Policy. The stream corridor is therefore considered to be a significant valleyland for the
purpose of this study. As outlined within the Official Plan, the retention of watercourses and valley and
stream corridors in an open and natural state should be promoted and achieved where possible. There is
no development proposed within 38 m and 75 m of the TRCA regulation limit and watercourse WC3,
respectively; as such, impacts to the stream corridor are not anticipated and mitigation measures are not
provided for this feature.
6.9
Significant Feature Summary
A summary of the significant Natural Heritage Features identified on or adjacent to the Study Area are
provided in the table below. This summary is based on four site visits and a review of available
documentation pertaining to the Study Area and adjacent lands.
Table 5
Significant Feature Summary
Feature
Present
Comment
Yes
There are three mapped watercourses in and within 120 m of the Study
Area. Two of these watercourses (WC2 and WC3) have the potential to
provide fish habitat within sections where flows are above ground. The
Wildrose Crescent potential routes traverse or are within 10 m of WC1
and WC2; whereas the closest Cedarwood Court and Abbey Road
routes are approximately 75 m and 88 m from WC3, respectively.
Significant ANSI
No
There are no ANSIs in or within 120 m of the Study Area.
Threatened or
Endangered Species
Habitat
Yes
An Eastern Meadowlark was observed in the manicured lawn area east
of Maple Gate Road. While a nest was not observed, it is possible that
the bird was nesting in this area. In addition, a Barn Swallow was
observed flying over the Study Area; however, the lack of suitable
nesting habitat within 120 m of the Study Area makes it unlikely that the
species is using the area for nesting.
Significant Wetland
No
There were no significant wetlands identified within 120 m of the Study
Area.
Significant Wildlife Habitat
Yes
Habitat for species of conservation concern has been identified within
the stream corridor and wetland (WE2) surrounding watercourse WC3.
This area may provide suitable habitat for Eastern Ribbonsnake, a
species listed as Special Concern on the SARO List. In addition, high
quality wildlife habitat has been identified within the West Duffins Creek
valley / Whitevale Corridor ESA and Rouge-Duffins Wildlife Corridor,
which are approximately 175 m and 10 m from potential sewer
alignments, respectively. There is no development proposed within
these significant habitats.
Significant Woodland
Yes
The woodland within the Nu West Ravine has been identified as a
significant woodland. Although the wooded areas and thickets within
the utility corridor may be considered woodlands, these wooded areas
are less than 2 ha in size and are not contiguous with larger woodland
tracts; and as such are not considered significant. There is no
development proposed within the significant Nu West Ravine woodland.
Significant Valleyland
Yes
Land surrounding watercourse WC3 is regulated by the TRCA and has
been identified within the City of Pickering Official Plan (2010) as a
stream corridor. This valleyland is considered to be significant for the
purpose of this study. There is no development proposed within the
valleyland, or within 75 m of WC3; and further mitigation measures are
not provided for this feature.
Fish Habitat
GENIVAR
16
7.
Proposed Works
The sanitary sewers on Abbey Road, Cedarwood Court and Wildrose Crescent, which are currently
connected to the existing Southeast Collector Trunk Sewer, are to be rerouted to the local sewerage
system through means of another local sewer that ultimately enters the Finch Liverpool Sewage Pumping
Station (SPS). Two alternative routes have been proposed for the Wildrose Crescent sewer, four for
Cedarwood Court and two for Abbey Road (refer to Figure 2). To install the sewers, trenches
approximately 1.2 m wide will have to be excavated. The area of impact is expected to be approximately
6 m wide along the length of the trench. This area will allow for the operation of equipment and movement
of machinery and personnel.
Preliminary assessments were completed to identify the preferred route for each sanitary sewer, and in
the process two alternatives for the Cedarwood Court were screened out. Alternative A was screened out
due to its proximity to the hydro tower, while Alternative C was screened out due to the excessive depth
of the trench that would be required to install the sewer. Of the two remaining alternatives, Alternative D
has been identified as the preferred route as the trench required to install the sewer is significantly
shallower than for Alternative B. Wildrose Crescent Alternative A and Abbey Road Alternative B have
been identified as the preferred routes for those sanitary sewers.
Access to each alternative route can be achieved by way of existing paths, roadways, and/or manicured
lawn. Sufficient clearance exists along the access routes to allow passage of vehicles and equipment,
and thus pruning/limbing of trees is not anticipated. Vegetation removal will be required for the
Cedarwood Court preferred route, but will be restricted to the area of impact described above.
8.
Impacts and Mitigation Measures
An impact assessment is required as part of the Environmental Assessment to determine the potential for
negative impacts on identified natural features or their ecological functions. In addition, suggestions for
preventative, mitigative or remedial measures must also be provided. Fish habitat, habitat for endangered
or threatened species, significant wildlife habitat, significant woodlands and significant valleylands were
identified within the Study Area. The area of impact associated with each sanitary sewer alternative is
highly localized and features that are more than 30 m from the sewer routes are unlikely to experience
significant negative impacts as a result of the proposed works.
8.1
Potential Impacts
Based on the results of agency consultation, background information review, and observations of the
existing conditions within the Study Area, it is unlikely that significant impacts to the natural environment
will occur as a result of the proposed works. The routes for the Abbey Road and Wildrose Crescent
sewers follow tracts of manicured lawn and existing roadways. Impacts associated with these sanitary
sewer installations would be limited to temporary disturbances to existing vegetation in the area of the
excavation. In the case of the Wildrose Crescent Alternatives, there is potential for impacts to
watercourse WC2 and wetland WE1 as a result of increased erosion, sedimentation and turbidity due to
exposed soils in the excavation area. Increased erosion and sedimentation can lead to changes in
surface water quality, decreased photosynthesis, loss of productivity, and increased vulnerability of the
site to invasion by non-native species. The potential for negative environmental impacts are reduced with
GENIVAR
17
Wildrose Crescent Alternative A, the preferred route, as the excavation area is approximately 63 m from
wetland WE1 and 85 m from WC2. Appropriately implemented standard erosion control measures, as
outlined within the following section should be sufficient to reduce or eliminate these potential impacts.
Impacts associated with the installation of the Cedarwood Court Sanitary Sewer Alternatives B and D will
be limited to existing vegetation and the potential for disturbance to local wildlife, particularly in the case
of Alternative D. Several shade and ornamental trees may have to be removed to permit the sewer
installation along Alternative B, whereas with Alternative D, a 6 m-wide path through the wooded area will
have to be cleared of trees and shrubs. There is potential for direct damage to the remaining trees and
their root systems within the wooded area as a result of the excavation. Direct damage to trees can result
in a decrease in tree survivability and species composition due to compromised tree health, as well as
increased vulnerability of the area to invasion by non-native species. Evidence of poor drainage was
noted within the thickets beneath the southern hydro line; there is potential for soil compaction and rutting
in this area. Soil compaction may result in changes to infiltration rates, drainage patterns and soil
moisture levels, thereby impacting species composition.
There is no development proposed within the TRCA regulated area, watercourse WC3 or the associated
stream corridor and wetland WE2. Given the size of the vegetated buffer between these surface water
features and the proposed Cedarwood Court and Abbey Road sanitary sewer routes, negative impacts to
natural drainage and surface water quality are not anticipated.
Eastern Meadowlark was observed within the manicured lawn area east of Maple Gate Road (refer to
Figure 2). An individual was observed on two separate survey dates and may be breeding in the area. As
a Threatened species, Eastern Meadowlark receives habitat protection under the Endangered Species
Act (Ontario, 2007). The nature of the proposed works will cause a temporary and isolated disturbance to
meadow and grassland habitat within the utility corridor. Once the work has been completed, disturbed
grassland areas will be seeded and returned to preconstruction conditions as quickly as possible. As a
migratory bird species, Eastern Meadowlark will only be in the Study Area between April 1 and July 31.
By timing the proposed works outside of this period the potential for harm, harassment or death of
individual birds will be eliminated. This timing restriction applies to meadows and manicured lawn areas
adjacent to the three sewer alignments and associated access routes within the Study Area.
8.2
Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures are recommended to address the anticipated impacts of construction
related activities, which have the potential to negatively affect the natural environment. For overall
protection and mitigation of the existing habitat, resident wildlife and potential SARs, the following
measures should be applied:
Wildlife and Species at Risk:


GENIVAR
Wildlife may be encountered in the Study Area. Wildlife observed during construction activities
should be gently removed from the Study Area if it can be done safely. Photos for identification
should be taken of animals observed on-site, if possible.
Eastern Meadowlark has been observed within the Study Area. As a threatened species, the
species and its habitat are protected under the Endangered Species Act (Ontario, 2007). To
ensure that impacts to the species do not occur, vegetation removal within meadows and
manicured lawn within the Study Area should not occur when the species has the potential to be
18

present (April 1 to July 31). Should vegetation removal be required during the April 1 to July 31
breeding period, a qualified avian biologist should conduct a thorough survey immediately prior to
the desired removal date to confirm presence or absence of this species.
Although not anticipated, if other Threatened or Endangered species are discovered during
construction, all operations will stop, or be modified to avoid any negative impacts to species at
risk until further direction is provided by OMNR. The contractor or contract administrator will
contact the Aurora District OMNR Species at Risk Biologist immediately upon the discovery of a
Threatened or Endangered species within the Study Area.
Woodlands and Areas of Natural Cover:










GENIVAR
Vegetation removal should be minimized where possible and restricted to the area of impact
surrounding the preferred sanitary sewer routes. Trees and shrubs will have to be removed to
permit construction of the Cedarwood Court Alternative D.
To reduce the potential for impacts to breeding birds in the area, removal of vegetation should
occur outside of the nesting season between May 1 and July 31 in accordance with the Migratory
Birds Convention Act (1994). Should it be determined that tree removal is required during the
breeding season, a nest survey by a qualified biologist must be conducted to confirm that no
breeding birds or active nests occur within the tree(s) to be removed.
To decrease the spread of invasive species, herbaceous ground cover including White Swallowwort, shall be collected and contained in geotextile material to limit seed dispersal during
preparatory activities. Upon completion of all works, plant debris should be disposed of properly
(i.e. placed in contained compost bins at local transfer station or landfill).
Efforts should be made to protect trees within the vicinity of the excavation. This can be achieved
by installing tree protection fencing between the excavation site and nearby trees or woodlands,
thereby reducing the potential for physical damage to the trees and their root systems. Supports
and bracing used to secure the barriers should be installed along the tree driplines, or further
away from the tree where possible, and in a way that minimizes root damage.
Tree protection fencing should be installed before work on the site begins and inspected regularly
to ensure it is performing its intended function. If any section is found to be damaged or nonfunctional it should be replaced immediately.
Storage or stockpiling of materials, disposal of liquids, and operation of heavy machinery are
prohibited within the area protected by the tree protection fencing.
If Cedarwood Court Alternative D is chosen as the preferred route, swamp mats should be used
within the thicket, where possible, to reduce the potential for soil compaction by heavy machinery
in areas with poor drainage.
Drive access to the each of the proposed routes will occur along existing roads, paths or within
areas with manicured lawn. Sufficient clearance exists along the access routes to allow passage
of vehicles and equipment, and thus pruning/limbing of trees is not anticipated. With careful
operation of heavy equipment and vehicles, significant impacts to vegetation along the access
routes are not anticipated.
Upon completion of construction, exposed soils should be restored to the original condition.
Erosion control fencing may be removed once vegetation has been established.
Areas of disturbed or exposed soil should be re-vegetated using a TRCA-approved native seed
mix. Where trees have been removed compensatory plantings using native tree or shrub species
that are suited to the local conditions should be completed (e.g. Sugar Maple, Trembling Aspen,
Balsam Poplar, White Birch, Basswood, etc.).
19
Aquatic Features including Fish Habitat and Wetlands:






9.
Erosion control fencing should be placed around all ongoing construction activity areas as well as
adjacent to temporary storage locations for supplies, excavated materials and imported fill.
Fencing should be properly installed and inspected at regular intervals and after significant rain
events to confirm it is functioning properly. Fencing should be regularly cleared of silt
accumulation to ensure the integrity of erosion prevention/sediment containment measures.
Areas of exposed soil, especially newly graded areas that cannot be immediately stabilized with
the final surface treatments should be appropriately treated to minimize erosion (e.g., straw
mulch, erosion blanket, sod, or hydroseed).
Temporarily store, handle and dispose of all materials used or generated (e.g. organics, soils,
woody debris, temporary stockpiles, construction debris) during site preparation, construction and
clean-up in a manner that prevents their entry to naturalized areas in the vicinity of the excavation
site.
In the event that water enters the trench during excavation and it is necessary to remove the
water to safely complete specific tasks, the Contractor will remove the water from the trench by
pumping it into a filter bag and onto an area of undisturbed vegetation located beyond the
boundaries of the work area and at least 30 m from the closest surface water feature.
Ensure a Spills Management Plan (including materials, instructions regarding their use, education
of contract personnel, emergency contact numbers) is onsite at all times for implementation in
event of accidental spill during construction. Adequate measures to prevent or capture and
contain any debris and spills resulting from construction activities should be kept onsite in
sufficient quantities. Staff should be orientated as to the location of materials and their proper use
and disposal. All measures and procedures should conform to pertinent provincial requirements.
Operating, refuelling and maintenance of construction equipment and the handling and storage of
toxic materials (e.g. fuel, lubricants, and other chemicals) must be carried out in such a way as to
avoid contamination of soils, groundwater and surface waters.
All parts of equipment shall be free of fluid leaks and externally cleaned/degreased offsite, in a
contained environment.
Conclusions and Recommendations
The following conclusions and recommendations are provided based on the study findings presented in
this report:

Two unevaluated wetlands WE1 and WE2 exist within the Study Area.

Three unnamed watercourses WC1, WC2 and WC3 exist within the Study Area. WC1 and WC2
are in the vicinity of the Wildrose Crescent Sanitary Sewer Alternatives.

Two Threatened species were observed within the Study Area during the site investigation.
Eastern Meadowlark was observed in the manicured lawn area east of Maple Gate Road and
may be nesting within the Study Area. In addition, a single Barn Swallow was observed flying
over the Study Area. There was no suitable Barn Swallow nesting habitat identified within the
Study Area; and as a result, impacts to this species are not anticipated.
GENIVAR
20

The wooded area within the Nu West Ravine, north of the utility corridor has been identified as a
significant woodland. Eastern Wood-pewee, a species of conservation concern, was observed in
this mature deciduous woodland. There is no development proposed within this significant
woodland. Wooded areas and thickets within the utility corridor are not considered significant.

Habitat for Eastern Ribbonsnake and Milksnake, which are species listed as Special Concern on
the SARO List, has been identified within wetland WE2 and the associated riparian corridor. This
area has also been identified as a significant valleyland within the City of Pickering Official Plan.
There is no development proposed within 65 m of WE2 and 75 m of WC3.

The Rouge-Duffins Wildlife Corridor exists within the utility corridor on the west side of Dixie
Road. There is no development proposed within this significant wildlife habitat.
Mitigation measures identified under Section 8.2 of this report should be reviewed and appropriately
implemented.
10.
Closure
This report has been prepared by GENIVAR Inc. The assessment represents the conditions at the subject
property only at the time of the assessment, and is based on the information referenced and contained in
the report. The conclusions presented herein respecting current conditions represent the best judgment of
the assessors based on current environmental standards. GENIVAR Inc. attests that to the best of our
knowledge, the information presented in this report is accurate. The use of this report for other projects
without written permission of the Client and GENIVAR Inc. is solely at the user’s own risk. This report
must be reviewed and approved by the relevant regulating agencies prior to being relied on for planning
and/or construction purposes.
Thank you for the opportunity to complete this report. We trust that this information is satisfactory for your
current requirements. Please contact us if we can be of further assistance.
Report prepared by:
GENIVAR Inc.
Reviewed by:
Erin A. Corstorphine, M.Sc.
Biologist
Dan J. Reeves, M.Sc.
Project Biologist
GENIVAR
21
11.
Literature Cited
AECOM. 2009. Southeast Collector Trunk Sewer Environmental Assessment Natural Environment Impact
Assessment of the Preferred Alternative Method Report. Final (Amended) Edition. Prepared for
the Regional Municipality of York and Regional Municipality of Durham.
Bird Studies Canada, Ontario Field Ornithologists, Environment Canada, Ontario Nature, and Ontario
Ministry of Natural Resources.
2006.
Ontario Breeding Bird Atlas Internet Site.
www.birdsontario.org/atlas/atlasmain.html.
City of Pickering. 2010. City of Pickering Official Plan. Available online:
http://www.pickering.ca/en/cityhall/resources/op6.pdf.
Dobbyn, J.S. 1994. Atlas of the Mammals of Ontario. Federation of Ontario Naturalists. 122 pp.
Fisheries and Oceans Canada. 2012. Distribution of Fish Species at Risk for the Toronto and Region
Conservation Authority. http://conservation-ontario.on.ca/projects/DFO.html.
Government of Canada Species at Risk (SARA) Public Registry. 2010.
http://www.sararegistry.gc.ca/species/schedules_e.cfm?id=1. Accessed July and September,
2011.
Government of Ontario. 2007. Endangered Species Act (ESA). Available online:
http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/html/statutes/english/elaws_statutes_07e06_e.htm
Lee, H.T., Bakowsky, W.D., Riley, J., Bowles, J., Puddister, M., Uhlig, P., and S. McMurray. 1998.
Ecological Land Classification for Southern Ontario: First Approximation and Its Application.
Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources, Southcentral Science Section, Science Development and
Transfer Branch. SCSS Field Guide FG-02.
Oldham, M.J. and W.F. Weller. 2000. Ontario Herpetofaunal Atlas. Natural Heritage Information Centre,
Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. http://nhic.mnr.gov.on.ca/MNR/nhic/herps/ohs.html.
Accessed July and September, 2011.
Ontario Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. 2005. Provincial Policy Statement. Queen’s Printer for
Ontario.
Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. 2010a. Land Information Ontario.
http://www.mnr.gov.on.ca/en/Business/LIO/index.html.
Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. 2010b. Natural Heritage Information Centre Database.
http:/nhic.mnr.gov.on.ca/nhic_.cfm.
Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. 2010c. Natural Heritage Reference Manual for Natural Heritage
Policies of the Provincial Policy Statement. Second Edition. Queen’s Printer for Ontario.
Pridham D. and M. Irvine. 2008. Forest Health Alert: Dog-strangling Vine (Cynanchum rossicum and C.
louiseae). Produced by Kawartha Conservation and the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources.
GENIVAR
22
Regional Municipality of Durham. 2008. Durham Regional Official Plan. 203 pp.
Toronto Region Conservation Authority. 2012. Petticoat Creek Watershed Action Plan.
GENIVAR
23
Figures
OA D 4
I
H
ORT
ET N
0
0
0
0
IO
NOT
0
E R ING PA R K
PI
CK
Y
WA 0
T
GH
AM
RO
AD
OAD
YP
MER
AR
A
RO
D
O
NTG
MO
K
CH
R
CH
BEA
IN
RO
AD
ET
TRE
LY S
BAY
D
ROA
T
N AD
OME
PR
ET
TRE
FS
CH
BEA
D
IN
PO
DY
SAN
E
DRIV
A
RO
AVENUE
AR
WH
IVE
OMA
EZ Y
DR
AH
OKL
IN
DL
MO
DOUGLAS
VE
BR E
E
DRIV
L
DILL
E
RA
TAT
OL
SALK ROAD
LAN
D
ROA
1
1
40
AY
HW
AY
1C
S
IRE
SQU
T
VIEW
40
E
LL
CO
W
GH
40
EC
0
HI
G
HI
OR
CT
TO
R
EE
STR
LINO
KEL
0
D
NU
LE
APP
D
UNT
EMO
D
ROA
ALE
G
ROU
ND
FAW
KI
NG
ST
O
N
TH
SOU
0
EET
STR
RCH
CHU
OA D
NR
0
AD
RO
D
ROA
RM
ROA
WAL
E
RIV
ET
GR
E
RIV
RT
H
RT
NO
EET
STR
NU E
0
AVE
RCH
N
CHU
0
TO
UE
L IN
N
AVE
ED
SID
COU
FA
AD
SU
NB
RNE
ER
RIV
TING
0
D
E GUIL
Y
LLE
VA
L RO
RIVE
TS D
NA
AN
W
GH
RI
HI
AD
VIS TUL
E COU RT
NIT
D
R OA
0
RO
AD
NT
E SCE
LS CR
IVE
DANIE
DR
0
MS
SIM
DRIVE
WILCE
E
HO
BUN
A
NE
I
LA
EF
RO S
RY
MO
ME
O
RPO
LIVE
AD
RO
H
IG
D
ROA
D
ROA
HILL
E
AY
A
EL
D
0
0
D
EY
D
N
G LE
R O OK DRIV
L
RAI
DT
E
DRIV
OA
E
T
POR
FAIR
UCE
D
D
RO A
N
ROA
PE HITES
W
O AD
AR
OA D
KR
OO
HE
D
ILL
RIV
S HA
DYB
NUE
AVE
RD
PPA
E
H
S
TRE
ER S
RIV
IN D
NN
SPR
AS
LE
BAN
NS
BUR
D
R OA
OAK
NUE
AVE
ONA
ALT
W
VIE
E
ROS
OD
WO
XW
LY
TSM
HUN
34
AMBE R
FO
OAD
TR
POR
E
ELIN
SID
L
TAP
E
ENU
H AV
FINC
ROA
FAIR
I
RAIL
RD T
SR
AB B
IE
DIX
OAD
N
SIO
CE S
EET
STR
T
TINS STREE
MAR
N
O
S
D
I
DAV
N
TWY
K
RY DRIV
DUBER
O
KR
ON
DC
AD
RO
R
EST
AD W
D RO
N
A
L
OSS
D
TOD
RIVE
R
N
EBA
JO
MA
ROS
3R
N
SIO
CE S
D
ROA
CD
IADO
MER
CO N
3RD
0
IV
DR
INS
RK
HA
D
ROA
D
ROA
CK
S
ING
BRO
TILL
AD
D
ROA
STREET
22
26
RO
N
NTO
TAU
N
MI
LL
CO
CR
ENS
RAV
LINE
LINE
UB
E
STR
RCH
CHU
SIDE
NR
E
ET
RIV
RE
RD
ST
UE
GE
IN
ING
EN
LL
AV
DR
E
B
LL
E
AR
D
SE
R OA
OFT
0
SIDE
F CL
GOL
O
SS
CE
E
A
BE
0
E
RIV
Lake Ontario
Legend
LOCATION MAP
Study Area
Wooded Areas
DURHAM RE-ROUTING OF THREE SANITARY SEWERS
IN THE CITY OF PICKERING
SCHEDULE B CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
NATURAL HERITAGE EXISTING CONDITIONS REPORT
Waterbodies
Watercourse
Roads
Data Source: Ministry of Natural Resources,
Ontario Base Mapping, July 2012
.
200100 0
200 Metres
DATE:
JULY 2013
PROJECT: 131-13092-00
SCALE: 1:50000
FILE. NO.:131-13092-00F1
FIGURE
1
25
r ive
y
R ig b
D r iv
e
11
6
%
%
rt
%
12
0
%
%
114
%
%
$
$
m
99
$
$
11
1
Cedarwood Court Alternative A
Cedarwood Court Alternative B
Cedarwood Court Alternative C
Cedarwood Court Alternative D
Wildrose Crescent Alternative A
$
$
$
%
Wildrose Crescent Alternative B
%
104
99
%
%
99
%
%
%%
at e
119
$
%
$
%
$
%
s
Dr
e
iv
105
e nt
nt
ht
resc
ig
sce
%
Cr e
101
o ft C
100
%
%
a rc r
107
$
He
%
Bar
nwo
qu
od S
50
100
150 m
1:3,200
Figure 2
96
97
%
10
1
%
100
a ne
%
0
eG
Ce d
one
g
Brid
m
Pe
st
b b le
sc
Cre
en t
98
af L
%
2
99
%
10
%
ll S t
97
hm i
DURHAM RE-ROUTING OF THREE SANITARY SEWERS
IN THE CITY OF PICKERING
SCHEDULE B CLASS ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
NATURAL HERITAGE EXISTING CONDITIONS REPORT
she
Bu s
%
re et
eat
10
3
%
%
%
Project No. 131-13092-00
Wh
%
%
%
%
% %
%
104
%
108
Abbey Road Alternative B
98
$
124
%
123
%
.5
Bramble
o ur t
wo od C
Abbey Road Alternative A
103
iv e
t Dr %
11
3
m
$ 34
114
88.1
m
%
%
$
$
12
1
m
Circle %
ldstone
105
v es
Ha r
ad
%
.7
120
%
nn
Ly
eet %
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
101
%
e
uar%
$
le
Ma p %
115
R id
rive
ge D
Potential Sanitary Sewer Routes
49.1
$$
$
$
Existing Sanitary Sewer
New South East Collector
(under construction)
$$
m
54.1 m
$$
Fie
97 m
o
42 m $
% ate R
$
le G
$
$
$ M ap
q
ve S
dgro %
m
%
%
36.9 m
71 m
W in
.6
116
%
ial Str
84
.3
%
%
Colon
m
m
$
%%
s c en t %
aury Cre
3
11
.3
0
11
%
6
11
YDSS
MH11
Existing Sanitary Chamber
m
$
$
m
109
109
% %
%
99
Eastern Wood-Pewee
64.9
75
m
Eastern Meadowlark
Existing Maintenance Hole
WC3
g
h
1
82.
.5
124
123
108
$$
6
70.
$
$
$
WE1
$
$
Butternut
Existing Sanitary Sewer Components
m
99
%
m
77 m
$122
76. 2
%
%
2
11
$
%
YDSS
MH13
%
12.1
57.9 m
57.9 m
%
75
m
%
m
o ad
WC2
%
.5
123
%
107 m
YDSS
MH12
$
98.2 m
%
%
%
%
%
eR
%%
%
%
$
$
108.8 m
%
nt
D ix i
119.8 m
%
104.7 m
77.7 m
%
sce
%
$
urt
%
113.3 m
%
120
o od Co
h
g
g
h
g
h
4
10
%
%
Wildro
sc e n t
s e C re
C e d a rw
Elevation Contour (1m Intervals)
Species Occurrences
ad
in
e
Conservation Area
l Ro
116
%
%
C re
la n e %
Ra
v
oad%
%
d ow
W
es
t
yR
%
%
Me a
NU
Wetlands (WE)
po o
%
%
Watercourse (WC)
e
1 09
12
6
L an
e
Abb
%
WE2
Whitevale Corridor ESA
(Environmentally Sensitive Area)
r
Live
ey
H a ls
%
127
108
%
%
%
109
g
h
d Court
110
Wooded Area & Thickets
106
111
%
%
118
WC1
7
11
112
11
0
%
YDSS
MH14
M
%
120
o
Trailwo%
rt
%
%
r C ou
C ou
%
%
e
Timb
2
11
Ma
na
do n
Legend
Natural Features
Toronto Regional Conservation
Authority Regulation Limit
%
125
113
%
g
h
%
7
12
127
g
h
¹
115
12
0
6
12
112
%
len
e
115
128
eG
Pin
iv
Dr
113
%
Go
m
ss a
D
er
are
%
Natural Heritage Features
26
Appendices
Appendix A
Agency Correspondence
Durham-Rerouting of Three Sanitary Sewers in the City of Pickering - Schedule B Class Environmental Assessment
Erin Corstorphine
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Erin Corstorphine
Monday, March 25, 2013 3:55 PM
Erin Corstorphine
FW: Re-routing for Local Sanitary Sewers EA - MNR response
From: Wendy Houlberg [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, March 04, 2013 1:28 PM
To: 'Kyle (MNR) Munro'
Cc: Chad Stephen; 'Bernie Visser'
Subject: RE: Re-routing for Local Sanitary Sewers EA - MNR response
3!C6/
)2+85C9?09<C9?<</=:98=/ */A366-98>+-> +-53/+=</;?3</.+=>2/:<91</==/=
)2+85C9?
*/8.C9?6,/<1&81
&<94/->#+8+1/<8138//<381&6+88381(>?.3/=
'/139890?<2+7 *9<5=/:>
'9==6+8.'9+.+=>>2 699<
*23>,C%8>+<39"
$
B>
From: Kyle (MNR) Munro [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: March-04-13 11:57 AM
To: Wendy Houlberg
Subject: Re-routing for Local Sanitary Sewers EA
/669*/8.C
#383=><C90$+>?<+6'/=9?<-/=#$'(>+002+@/</@3/A/.>2/(>?.C</+09<'/<9?>38109<"9-+6(+83>+<C(/A/<=,,/C
'./.+<A99.<>*36.<9=/</=8&3-5/<381%8>+<393./8>303/.38C9?<$9>3-/90(>?.C977/8-/7/8>6/>>/<
</-/3@/./,<?+<C
&6/+=/89>/>2+> 9?<</-9<.=.989>38.3-+>/+8C$(=A/>6+8.=9<+8C=:/-3/=+><3=5
69-+>/.+>9< 377/.3+>/6C+.4+-/8>>9>2/69-+>398=)2/</.9/=+::/+<>9,/+,<+8-290+8?88+7/.A+>/<-9?<=/
:</=/8>,/>A//8>2/,,/C'.+8./.+<A99.<>"9-+>398= =C9?A9<5>2<9?12>2/:<9-/==:6/+=/</:9<>
+8C('/8-9?8>/</.A3>238>2/=>?.C+</+>9>23=9003-/-9 (?<9<+98>+<39-+ :<39<>9=/6/->39890
+6>/<8+>3@/=09<>2/
89<./<>9+==3=>A3>2>2//003-3/8-C909?<</=:98=/=>90?>?</38;?3<3/=:6/+=/89>/>2+>C9?7+C/7+36C9?<</;?/=>=
+8.9<89>3-/=.3</->6C>9 +-53/?<5+<>98>+<39-+
(29?6.C9?2+@/+8C0?<>2/<;?/=>398=:6/+=/-98>+-> +-53/?<5+<>+>
Sincerely,
1
GENIVAR
A-1
Durham - Re-routing of Three Sanitary Sewers in the City of Pickering - Schedule B Class Environment Assessment
#&'&&#(&6+88/<
?<9<+3=><3->#383=><C90$+>?<+6'/=9?<-/=
6997381>98'9+. ?<9<+%$ ""
)/6/:298/
+-=3736/
!C6/#?8<998>+<39-+
2
GENIVAR
A-2
Durham - Re-routing of Three Sanitary Sewers in the City of Pickering - Schedule B Class Environmental Assessment
Erin Corstorphine
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Ben Krul <[email protected]>
Monday, April 22, 2013 3:36 PM
Erin Corstorphine
RE: Durham Class EA
Hi Erin,
Nice to meet you too!
That will be all the information that we have on the site. Typically when I make a request to our GIS folks I ask for all
available data, so I am going to assume that they have provided me with everything.
Take care,
Ben
? 0&22*6? **0&2)96-&1!*,.32?2:.6321*28&077*771*28 0&22.2,?#363283&2)!*,.32
327*6:&8.32 ?"-36*-&16.:*?#363283?"
?
<8? '/69086(&32(&
?;;;86(&32(& ?
Please consider the environment before printing this email
From:
Erin Corstorphine <[email protected]>
To:
Ben Krul <[email protected]>,
Date:
04/22/2013 12:03 PM
Subject:
RE: Durham Class EA
.*2
8;&72.(*831**8=39326.)&=&88-*$-.8*7!3&)# 7.8* @ &0;&=72.(*83498&+&(*838-*2&1*
-&)(328&(8*)=3983;&6)78-**2)3+&6(-;.8-&2.2+36*59*78+368-*96-&10&77+368-*).:*67.323+8-6**7&2.8&6=
87*;*67+6318-*%""838-*03(&07*;*67=78*133/70./*=39+36;&6)*)731*.2+383&6*2*2/.*;.(>3246.0 7.87&+*83
&7791*8-&88-&8.7&008-*2&896&0+*&896*)&8&&:&.0&'0*+631#!+368-.77.8*978;&28*)831&/*796*;*;*6*2A8*<4*(8.2,&
7*4&6&8*).++*6*284&(/&,*
#-&2/7
6.2
Erin Corstorphine, BSc, MSc
Biologist
GENIVAR Inc.
1091 Gorham Street, Suite 301, Newmarket, ON L3Y 8X7
Direct: (905) 853-3303 ext. 232 | Cell: (905) 967-3330 |
1
GENIVAR
A-3
Durham - Rerouting of Three Sanitary Sewers in the City of Pickering - Schedule B Class Environmental Assessment
\
www.genivar.com
From: Ben Krul [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2013 11:58 AM
To: Erin Corstorphine
Subject: Durham Class EA
Hi Erin,
I have put in your request and should have the information shortly. If you have any further questions please direct them to
me.
Thanks,
Ben
? 0&22*6? **0&2)96-&1!*,.32?2:.6321*28&077*771*28 0&22.2,?#363283&2)!*,.32
327*6:&8.32 ?"-36*-&16.:*?#363283?"
?
<8? '/69086(&32(&
?;;;86(&32(& ?
Please consider the environment before printing this email
"*PLEASE CONSIDER THE ENVIRONMENT WHEN DECIDING TO PRINT THIS MESSAGE*
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Confidentiality Notice:
The information contained in this communication including any attachments may be confidential, is intended only for use of the recipient(s) named above, and may
be legally privileged. If the reader of the message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution,disclosure or copying of
this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please resend this communication to the sender and delete it
permanently from your computer system.
Thank you."
CONFIDENTIALITY WARNING:
This message is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed, and may contain information which is privileged, confidential,
proprietary or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient or the person responsible for delivering the message to the
intended recipient, you are strictly prohibited from disclosing, distributing, copying or in any way using this message. If you have received this communication in
error, please notify the sender, and destroy and delete any copies you may have received.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------AVERTISSEMENT:
Ce message est destiné uniquement à la personne ou à l’organisation à laquelle il est adressé et il peut contenir des informations privilégiées, confidentielles ou
non divulgables en vertu de la loi. Si vous n’êtes pas le destinataire du présent message ni la personne chargée de remettre le présent message à son
destinataire, il vous est strictement interdit de le divulguer, de le distribuer, de le copier ou de l’utiliser de quelque façon que ce soit. Si vous avez reçu la présente
communication par erreur, veuillez en aviser l’expéditeur et détruire ou effacer tous les exemplaires que vous avez reçus.
"*PLEASE CONSIDER THE ENVIRONMENT WHEN DECIDING TO PRINT THIS MESSAGE*
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Confidentiality Notice:
The information contained in this communication including any attachments may be confidential, is intended only for use of the recipient(s) named above, and may
be legally privileged. If the reader of the message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution,disclosure or copying of
this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please resend this communication to the sender and delete it
permanently from your computer system.
Thank you."
2
GENIVAR
A-4
6
L
GUI
D
DR
95
12.2 0
12.1 9
.1
12
.1
12
7
8
65 3 80 0 m E
K
PAR
L
VAL
EY
M
FAR
RD
N
GL E
RD
65 3, 00 0 m E
VIE
N
GL E
ANE
SQ R
YL
LD
OR
EFIE
MEM
ROS
DR
7
ST
ON
ANT
CR
K
DR
o.
E
S CRE
GE
AT E
EG
RID
D U FF IN
N
SHEE T
D
WR
DAL
9 5 .0
Feet
4 85 6 6 00 m N
LE
IDG
EST
1000
R
TD
P
MA
BR
65 2 90 0 m E
S
RVE
Met r es
R
ED
LE
FAY
HT B
LVD
EK
90
9 7 .1
RD
9 7 .7
200
DLIG
RE
SC
22
9 8 .3
FO R
9 8 .5
-66 00
800
EC
R ST
FIEL
FI N
T
21
LO
9 8 .2
L
OO
R U IN
2
12.2
600
9 8 .2
661
4 (4 16)
HA
100
DR
UF
ED
T
ER P
9 9 .2
1S
rio M 3N
RS T
R
LIN
LO
LIV
ew O nta
ES:
ME T R
L 1 .0
T E R VA
400
1 : 20 00
Sc al e
URIN
R
T CH
MA
AD
0
Do wn svi
C O N TO
ER
D
RO
9 9 .3
9 0 .7
ve
eha m Dri
200
WL
OL
5 S hor
O
BO
PO
ER
100
LE
LI V
Met r es
.0
90
.0
BO
W
10 0
23
200
FT C
95
T
D C
22
T
Feet
RO
T
OO
EW
LO T
LO
2 -2 7
ARC
CRS
G
RI D
T
20 0 4 -0
9 0 .3
CRS
Y
WA
TO N
B EA
Y DR
SH A
ST
9 2 .4
1 0 7 .2
9 1 .1
PL AIN
FL OO D
G R AM
G PR O
D AT E :
9 8 .9
ADY
Y DR
ER R
R
CR
95
9 1 .4
O VE D
89 .7 1
C ED
9 5 .0
R
MCB
DUB
BY D
OD
AD
RD
10 0
MAP PIN
P PR
L IN E A
CR
RD
WO
RO
B EY
11 0
10 0
RM
FA
LE Y
VA L
AB
LY
EN OTE:
PLEAS
OR IG INALES IN
AP WAS
TH ISM E D BY J.D. BARN
ZED
AS D IGITI
COM PIL
M AP W HICS INC. IN
19 7 7. THIS
GEO GRAP
BYQ SP
20 0 3.
12
7
12 0
FL OO D
R
IA
LY D
CK
BRO
ST
D EN
RT
E RS
O
TO N
SD
95
95
.0
.0
R
ND
NO
.0
R
N
P L AN
B EN
HT
EI G
NH
AN
.0
90
NC
RS
1 0 1 .3
D
IE R
NC
.9 5
88
.7 6
87
IN
LYN
DU
1 9
1 .
9
ODE
O
R VE Y
DIX
9 9 .1
D
ST
9 5
0 .
9
9 8 .8
RD
9 8 .2
E
NU
AV E
CH
FI N
9 8 .3
N1
CO
9 8 .6
YL
R
RY C
5 8
2 .
9
9 7 .9
P
N2
CO
9 7 .6
ANE
NBU
6 2
4 .
9
91 .8 8
12.1 6
95
9 8 .4
K
4, 85 6, 3 00 m N
89
9 2
7 .
8
9 9 .3
ST
9 9 .6
9 1 .2
G
CRT
T
1 0 2 .1
LD
WI
10 0
SU
Ma rsh all
Ma ckli n
han
Mo nag
65 2 40 0 m E
E RS
9 4 .9
A
9 7
7 .
8
930
TH E
I E
N
9 5 .6
AL E D
D EN V
E NG
9 4 .6
1 9 . 8
D
OO
W
LIN
9 9 .6
9 7 .6
4 85 6 7 00 m N
20
E RS
1 2 0 .2
S
INEER'
NOTE:
PLEA SE
NAL ENG
FE SSIO THE FL OO D
TH E PRO
VERI FIES TED DATA
STAM P
C IA
D ASSO
LINE AN M AP DATA
TED
ISE NO
NOT THE
OTH ERW
UNL ESS
10 5
21
NAG
11 5
GE
LO D
A LA
28 1
0
69
3 .6
9 6 .1
LO T
5
A
9 5 .6
4 85 7 6 00 m N
10 5
10
11 0
T M
9 8 .2
R
OOD
.3 1
.0
.0
92
11 5
9 8 .2
E C
P R OJ
1 2 2 .3
O
8 5
0 .
9
.9 7
88
. 3
8
87
8 1
3 .
9
12 0
f ro m
r ci al yl
mme t
o to gr a
.
l d ph
ie
li 19 77
c om p
i Ap r
ap w as
se d n
Th si m
y ex po
t og ra h
al p ho
0 ae r i
ed
ab il sh
1/ 10 00
a s e st
l ev el
n se a
si m ea
d at u m
r t ci al
a.
Th e ve
C an ad
r ve y of
t ci S u
G eo de
by t he
j ct i on
e
^ pr o
. . M. 6
UT
1 92 7,
a tu m
ca n D
A m er i
W .
07
No r t h
i n 8 1^
, i n 20
i a
d
m 19 83
r l M er
nt a
n D a tu
17, Ce
m e r ci a
Z on e
o rt h A
d tp N
or m e
Tr ab sf
EC T TO
:
E SU BJ
N.
E NO TE
ON S AR
RM ATIO
PL EAS
E VATI
ED IN FO
IN E EL
FL OO DL
T O R EVIS
E D UE
CHA NG
9 8 .6
RE
90
6
6 .8
9 7
1 .
9
40
6 5
2 .
9
1 1 . 5
r es .
00 m et
va l 1
i I n t er
G rd
1 2 1 .9
Legend
IRW
8 2
3 .
9
1 0 4 .2
10 5
LO T
5
1 2 . 1
N
MA
MEL
D
B
1 2 . 2
R
SQ A-5
M
.0
E
LA N
LE
E AG
T
ON
2 8
9 .
2
92
28 2
1 3
2 .
9
90
8 0
9 .
8
2 6
3 .
9
9 7
4 .
9
11 0
X
P
12
1 2 2 .8
RT
NC
n s
ti h P ylo
w
9 8 .7
PMA
es, w
i th P ol
H
1 2 1 .6
RA
fauna_trca
2 9
1 .
9
3 7
4 .
9
9 8 .6
CHA
Li ne, w
2 3 . 9
1
ST
T
AY
'S B
M AN
CH
EN
FR
9 7 .0
13 0
IN
MATC HL
IN
E DU FF
12.2 7
S CR EE
8
13 7
13
21
T r ail
i ssi on
9 8 .5
flora_trca
3 2
2 .
9
CA
3
27 9
9 3 .0
2
. 6
0 7
1
12.2 3
h,
,F oot pat
li l
t and F
Cl fi f, Cu
oot br i dge
i ge, F
Br d
Fenc e
Pow er
ay
Cul ver t
m
ver Da
Dam , Bea
ie
Pi pel n
Wall
Hed ge
e
l o d Lin
o ry F o
Reg ul at
d Ar ea
R unw
Ai rp or t
Chi m ney
Woode
l ay
Rai w
Tr ansm
an
ti h M edi
rf ac e, w
ar d Su
Roa d, H
ur f ace
oose S
ay, or L
R oa d
,D r vi e w
W agon
t T r ack,
ne, Car
,F ar m La
ND
LE GE
L
23
1 2 . 4
N
RS
HC
G
ROU
NBO
E
LIN
CH
MAT
C
5 .3
27 5
.0
90
95
2 4 . 3
1
StudyArea
4
EET
9 2 .3
E
LA N
EY
S
HAL
LO T
F
R
LO T
24
9 9 .7
esa_trca
9 2
5 .
9
22
S
RE
D
RUI N
U/ C
LO T
2 4 . 8
1
5
10
11 5
95 .6 5
SH
VE
HA
FIN
1 0 6 .7
D
MA
LO T
F
F/L
0
12 7
P
1 0 0 .1
P
PO P
B LA
8 6
2 .
9
.0
97
12.2 4
EK 2 8
N S C RE
48
R
13
AD
10 0
NM
RegulationLimit_trca
VO
9 0 .0
9
. 0
0 0
1
1 0 0 .1
MP
QR
RS
TE
ES
UC
G LO
.0
94
.0
95
9 7 .7
ATE
PRIV
T
NIAL S
COL O
9 1 .7
D
TE R
E GA
L
MAP
11 0
AC
N
ON
EN
9 8 .3
0
RT
GL
E
PIN
96 .9 6
SS
GO
DR
K
EE
10 0
10
1 2 . 1
W/ L9 6 .9
11
5
12
12.2 1
28
9 4 .5
TN
o.
1 6 . 4
DU
F F IN
SC
R
SHE
E
1 8 . 7
100
0
12 0
E
ED
ST
OR
1 8 . 2
Fee
t
DR
ER
M
A
1 0 0 .2
L
1 0 0 .8
9 8 .8
C R ST
Y
MAUR
200
1 0 1 .1
10 0
9 7 .4
5
11
0
1 2 3 .6
9 9 .2
1 0 0 .6
10 3 .7 9
RS
0
6 0.
10
4
EET
SH
B AY
600
50
D
24
RO
25
800
N E D UFFI
D
IE
LO T
LO T
400
9 8 .2
D IX
100
600
6 1 -6
6) 6
es
Met
r
S:
RE
ET
M
1. 0
L
TE
R VA
IN
UR
N TO
CO
N1
S4
00
1 :
20
al e
Sc
ta rio
(4 1
200
9 9 .5
12 5
11 0
11 0
On
ew
n s vi
M3
0
O
e
5
. 3
0 2
1
8
. 1
0 5
1
ham
D riv
100
es
Met
r
R EF
5S
D ow
200
Fee
t
h o re
-2 7
-0 2
20 0
4
3
12
12.2 6
10 4 .9 2
0
10
Date: March 19, 2013
Created By: Information Systems/
Information Technology
Project Location: C:\Projects\ForBenKrul
MAJOR OAKS RD
\DurhamClassEA\DurhamClassEA.zip
M
9 7 .1
12 0
12.3 0
5
12
1 6 . 9
10 9 .5 1
11 5
11 5
11 0
O
ET
N
1 0 0 .1
1 9 . 4
BRO
D E LL
12 5
10 5
120
5
12
DD data has
AT Ebeen flagged in this area.
* SAR (Species at Risk)
MI
DG
O
WO
Please contact
for more information
ER
PMNR
EP
11 1 .0 4
0 5 . 1
1
in
at o
i n, F ound
uct o
D
3 4 . 4
1
1 0 3 .9
ST
11 0
3 6 . 4
1
10 5
1 2 .1 6
2 5 . 6
1
FL O
OD
PP
IN G PL AIN
PR
OG
RA
D
D
MA
0 9 . 2
1
E
O K AV
11
5
13
5
3 6 . 5
1
1 4 .4 3
10
D
3 6 . 2
1
D
Appendix B
NHIC Search Results
Durham – Re-routing of Three Sanitary Sewers in the City of Pickering – Schedule B Class Environmental Assessment
Appendix B: NHIC Search Results
Element Occurrences:
Eastern Ribbonsnake (Thamnophis sauritus)
Species Element Occurrence Report
help
Scientific name:
Thamnophis sauritus
Common name:
Eastern Ribbonsnake
Family:
Colubridae
Global (G-rank):
G5
Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC): SC
Ontario (S-rank):
S3
Species At Risk in Ontario (SARO):
SC
Canada General Status:
Sensitive
Ontario General Status:
Sensitive
1 Element Occurrence Retrieved
EO ID
UTM Zone
Easting(nearest km)
Northing(nearest km)
EO Rank
Last Observed Date
90742
17
652000
4854000
H
1968-05-17
Redside Dace (Clinostomus elongatus)
help
Scientific name:
Clinostomus elongatus
Common name:
Redside Dace
Family:
Cyprinidae
Global (G-rank):
G3G4
Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC): END
Ontario (S-rank):
S2
END
May be at risk
At Risk
EO ID
UTM Zone
Easting(nearest km)
EO Rank
Last Observed Date
7502
17
652000
4860000
E
1996-07
GENIVAR
H:\Proj\MARKHAM\13\13092-00\16 Investigation and Report\0464011\Tech\REPORT\Appendix B - NHIC Search
Results.docx
B-1
Green-striped Darner (Aeshna verticalis)
help
Scientific name:
Aeshna verticalis
Common name:
Green-striped Darner
Family:
Aeshnidae
Global (G-rank):
G5
Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC):
Ontario (S-rank):
S3
EO ID
UTM Zone
Easting(nearest km)
EO Rank
Last Observed Date
68018
17
646000
4849000
H
1940-09-22
Clamp-tipped Emerald (Somatochlora tenebrosa)
help
Scientific name:
Somatochlora tenebrosa
Common name:
Clamp-tipped Emerald
Family:
Corduliidae
Global (G-rank):
G5
Ontario (S-rank):
S2S3
EO ID
UTM Zone
Easting(nearest km)
EO Rank
Last Observed Date
41335
17
644000
4848000
H
1941-07-06
GENIVAR
Results.docx
B-2
Burning Bush (Euonymus atropurpureus)
help
Scientific name:
Euonymus atropurpureus
Common name:
Burning Bush
Family:
Celastraceae
Global (G-rank):
G5
Ontario (S-rank):
S3
EO ID
UTM Zone
Easting(nearest km)
EO Rank
Last Observed Date
33292
17
649000
4852000
H
1973-08-08
Lurking Leskea (Plagiothecium latebricola)
help
Scientific name:
Plagiothecium latebricola
Common name:
Lurking Leskea
Family:
Plagiotheciaceae
Global (G-rank):
G3G4
Ontario (S-rank):
S2
EO ID
UTM Zone
Easting(nearest km)
EO Rank
Last Observed Date
67646
17
645000
4852000
H
1983-05-11
GENIVAR
Results.docx
B-3
Appendix C
Species Lists
Appendix C: Record of Species Observed during the Site Investigation
Table 1: Bird Species
Scientific Name
Common Name
Agelaius phoeniceus
Anas platyrhnchos
Archilochus colubris
Bombycilla cedrorum
Cardinalis cardinalis
Colaptes auratus
Contopus virens
Corvus brachyrhynchos
Cyanocitta cristata
Dumetella carolinensis
Geothlypis trichas
Haemorhous mexicanus
Hirundo rustica
Icterus galbula
Larus delawarensis
Melospiza melodia
Molothrus ater
Myiarchus crinitus
Oreothlypis ruficapilla
Passer domesticus
Pheucticus ludovicianus
Picoides pubescens
Poecile atricapillus
Quiscalus quiscula
Riparia riparia
Setophaga caerulescens
Setophaga coronata
Setophaga palmarum
Red-winged Blackbird
Mallard
Ruby-throated Hummingbird
Cedar Waxwing
Northern Cardinal
Northern Flicker
Eastern Wood-pewee
American Crow
Blue Jay
Gray Catbird
Common Yellowthroat
House Finch
Barn Swallow
Baltimore Oriole
Ring-billed Gull
Song Sparrow
Brown-headed Cowbird
Great Crested Flycatcher
Nashville Warbler
House Sparrow
Rose-breasted Grosbeak
Downy Woodpecker
Black-capped Chickadee
Common Grackle
Bank Swallow
Black-throated Blue Warbler
Yellow-rumped Warbler
Palm Warbler
GENIVAR
GRank1
SRank1
COSEWIC2
SARO3
G5
G5
G5
G5
G5
G5
G5
G5
G5
G5
G5
G5
G5
G5
G5
G5
G5
G5
G5
G5
G5
G5
G5
G5
G5
G5
G5
G5
S5
S5
S5B
S5B
S5
S4B
S4B
S5B
S5
S4B
S5B
SNA
S4B
S4B
S5B, S4N
S5B
S4B
S4B
S5B
SNA
S4B
S5
S5
S5B
S4B
S5B
S5B
S5B
SC
THR
-
THR
-
H:\Proj\MARKHAM\13\13092-00\16 Investigation and Report\0464011\Tech\REPORT\Appendix C - Species Lists.docx
Breeding
Evidence4
CONF
POSS
CONF
PROB
PROB
POSS
POSS
PROB
PROB
POSS
PROB
PROB
PROB
PROB
POSS
POSS
POSS
CONF
CONF
POSS
-
C-1
Scientific Name
Common Name
Setophaga pensylvanica
Setophaga petechia
Setophaga ruticilla
Sitta carolinensis
Spinus tristis
Spizella passerina
Sturnella magna
Sturnus vulgaris
Tachycineta bicolor
Toxostoma rufum
Troglodytes aedon
Turdus migratorius
Tyrannus tyrannus
Vireo gilvus
Vireo olivaceus
Zenaida macroura
Chestnut-sided Warbler
Yellow Warbler
American Redstart
White-breasted Nuthatch
American Goldfinch
Chipping Sparrow
Eastern Meadowlark
European Starling
Tree Swallow
Brown Thrasher
House Wren
American Robin
Eastern Kingbird
Warbling Vireo
Red-eyed Vireo
Mourning Dove
GRank1
SRank1
COSEWIC2
SARO3
G5
G5
G5
G5
G5
G5
G5
G5
G5
G5
G5
G5
G5
G5
G5
G5
S5B
S5B
S5B
S5
S5B
S5B
S4B
SNA
S4B
S4B
S5B
S5B
S4B
S5B
S5B
S5
THR
-
THR
-
Breeding
Evidence4
PROB
POSS
POSS
PROB
PROB
PROB
CONF
POSS
POSS
POSS
CONF
PROB
PROB
PROB
CONF
1
Nature Conservancy conservation concern rankings (NHIC, 2010): G - Global Level, S - Sub-national Rank (Ontario), B - Breeding, N – Non-breeding, 1 Critically Imperiled, 2 - Imperiled, 3 - Vulnerable, 4 - Apparently Secure, 5 - Secure. Protection status: 2COSEWIC - Committee on the Status of Endangered
3
4
Wildlife in Canada; SARO - Species at Risk in Ontario; END – Endangered, THR – Threatened, SC – Special concern, “-“ – Not listed. Breeding Status as per
Ontario Breeding Bird Atlas (2001): CONF – Confirmed, PROB – Probable, POSS – Possible, and “-“ – Observed but no breeding evidence.
GENIVAR
C-2
Table 2: Vertebrate Species
Family
Colubridae
Leporidae
Procyonidae
Ranidae
Ranidae
Sciuridae
Sciuridae
Sciuridae
Scientific Name
Thamnophis sirtalis sirtalis
Sylvilagus floridanus
Procyon lotor
Rana clamitans
Rana pipiens
Tamias striatus
Sciurus carolinensis
Tamiasciurus hudsonicus
Common Name
Eastern Garter Snake
Eastern Cottontail
Raccoon
Green Frog
Northern Leopard Frog
Eastern Chipmunk
Eastern Gray Squirrel
Red Squirrel
Notes
Direct observation
Direct observation
Tracks
Direct observation
Direct observation
Direct observation
GRank1
-
SRank1
-
COSEWIC2
G5T5
G5
G5
G5
G5
G5
SARO3
S5
S5
S5
S5
S5
S5
Direct observation
Direct observation
-
-
G5
G5
S5
S5
1
Nature Conservancy conservation concern rankings (NHIC, 2010): G - Global Level, S - Sub-national Rank (Ontario), B - Breeding, N – Non-breeding, 1 Critically Imperiled, 2 - Imperiled, 3 - Vulnerable, 4 - Apparently Secure, 5 - Secure. Protection status: 2COSEWIC - Committee on the Status of Endangered
3
Wildlife in Canada; SARO - Species at Risk in Ontario; END – Endangered, THR – Threatened, SC – Special concern, “-“ – Not listed.
Table 3: Invertebrate Species
Family
Lycaenidae
Nymphalidae
Pieridae
Pieridae
Scientific Name
Celastrina ladon
Nymphalis antiopa
Colias philodice
Pieris rapae
Common Name
Spring Azure
Mourning Cloak
Clouded Sulfur
Cabbage White
GRank1
G5
G5
G5
G5
SRank1
S5
S5
S5
SNA
COSEWIC2
-
SARO3
-
1
Nature Conservancy conservation concern rankings (NHIC, 2010): G - Global Level, S - Sub-national Rank (Ontario), B - Breeding, N – Non-breeding, 1 2
Critically Imperiled, 2 - Imperiled, 3 - Vulnerable, 4 - Apparently Secure, 5 - Secure. Protection status: COSEWIC - Committee on the Status of Endangered
3
Wildlife in Canada; SARO - Species at Risk in Ontario; END – Endangered, THR – Threatened, SC – Special concern, “-“ – Not listed.
GENIVAR
C-3
Table 4: Vegetation Species
Family
Aceraceae
Aceraceae
Aceraceae
Aceraceae
Aceraceae
Alismataceae
Anacardiaceae
Anacardiaceae
Apiaceae
Apocynaceae
Araliaceae
Asclepiadaceae
Asclepiadaceae
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
Asteraceae
Balsaminaceae
Berberidaceae
Betulaceae
Betulaceae
Betulaceae
GENIVAR
Scientific Name
Acer negundo
Acer platanoides
Acer rubrum
Acer saccharinum
Acer saccharum
Sagittaria latifolia
Rhus radicans ssp. negundo
Rhus typhina
Daucus carota
Apocynum sp
Aralia nudicaulis
Asclepias syriaca
Cynanchum rossicum
Achillea millefolium
Aster sp.
Chrysanthemum leucanthemum
Cirsium arvense
Cirsium vulgare
Erigeron sp.
Eupatorium maculatum
Eupatorium perfoliatum
Rudbeckia hirta
Solidago canadensis
Taraxacum officinale
Tragopogon dubius
Tussilago farfara
Impatiens capensis
Podophyllum peltatum
Betula alleghaniensis
Betula papyrifera
Carpinus caroliniana
Common Name
Manitoba Maple
Norway Maple
Red Maple
Silver Maple
Sugar Maple
Common Arrowhead
Poison-ivy
Staghorn Sumac
Wild Carrot
Dogbane Species
Wild Sarsaparilla
Common Milkweed
White Swallow-wort
Common Yarrow
Aster Species
Ox-eye Daisy
Canada Thistle
Bull Thistle
Fleabane Species
Spotted Joe-pye Weed
Common Boneset
Black-eyed Susan
Canada Goldenrod
Common Dandelion
Doubtful Goat's-beard
Coltsfoot
Spotted Jewel-weed
Mayapple
Yellow Birch
White Birch
Blue Beech
CC1
0
0
4
5
4
4
5
1
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
3
2
0
1
0
0
0
4
5
2
2
6
CW2
-2
5
0
-3
3
_5
-1
5
5
3
5
5
3
5
3
4
-5
-4
3
3
3
5
3
-3
3
2
2
0
GRANK3
G5
G?
G5
G5
G5
G5
G5
G5
G?
G5
G5
G?
G5
G?
G?
G5
G5
G5
G5
G5
G5
G?
G?
G5
G5
G5
G5
G5
SRANK3
S5
SE5
S5
S5
S5
S5
S5
S5
SE5
S5
S5
SE5
SE
SE5
SE5
SE5
S5
S5
S5
S5
SE5
SE5
SE5
S5
S5
S5
S5
S5
C-4
Family
Betulaceae
Boraginaceae
Brassicaceae
Brassicaceae
Brassicaceae
Brassicaceae
Brassicaceae
Caprifoliaceae
Caprifoliaceae
Caprifoliaceae
Caprifoliaceae
Caprifoliaceae
Caryophyllaceae
Clusiaceae
Convolvulaceae
Cornaceae
Cornaceae
Cornaceae
Cupressaceae
Cyperaceae
Cyperaceae
Dryopteridaceae
Elaeagnaceae
Equisetaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
Fabaceae
GENIVAR
Scientific Name
Ostrya virginiana
Myosotis scorpioides
Alliaria petiolata
Barbarea vulgaris
Capsella bursa-pastoris
Cardamine diphylla
Nasturtium officinale
Lonicera canadensis
Lonicera tatarica
Sambucus Canadensis
Viburnum acerifolium
Viburnum trilobum
Silene latifolia
Hypericum perforatum
Convolvulus arvensis
Cornus alternifolia
Cornus rugosa
Cornus stolonifera
Thuja occidentalis
Carex sp
Scirpus cyperinus
Onoclea sensibilis
Elaeagnus angustifolia
Equisetum arvense
Coronilla varia
Lotus corniculatus
Melilotus alba
Robinia pseudo-acacia
Trifolium aureum
Trifolium hybridum
Trifolium pratense
Trifolium repens
Vicia cracca
Common Name
Ironwood
Common Forget-me-not
Garlic Mustard
Common Wintercress
Shepherd's Purse
Broad-leaved Toothwort
Water-cress
Fly Honeysuckle
Tartarian Honeysuckle
Common Elderberry
Maple-leaved Viburnum
Highbush Cranberry
Bladder Campion
Common St. John's-wort
Field Bindweed
Alternate-leaved Dogwood
Round-leaved Dogwood
Red-osier Dogwood
Eastern White Cedar
Sedge Species
Wool Grass
Sensitive Fern
Russian Olive
Field Horsetail
Trailing Crown-vetch
Bird's-foot Trefoil
White Sweet-clover
Black Locust
Yellow Clover
Alsike Clover
Red Clover
White Clover
Cow Vetch
CC1
4
0
0
0
0
7
0
6
0
5
6
5
0
0
0
6
6
2
4
4
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
CW2
4
-5
0
0
1
5
-5
3
3
-2
5
-3
5
5
5
5
5
-3
-3
-5
-3
4
0
5
1
3
4
5
1
2
2
5
GRANK3
G5
G5
G?
G?
G?
G5
G?
G5
G?
G5
G5
G5T5
G?
G?
G?
G5
G5
G5
G5
G5
G5
G?
G5
G?
G?
G5
G5
G?
G?
G?
G?
G?
SRANK3
S5
SE5
SE5
SE5
SE5
S5
SE
S5
SE5
S5
S5
S5
SE5
SE5
SE5
S5
S5
S5
S5
S5
S5
SE3
S5
SE5
SE5
SE5
SE5
SE5
SE5
SE5
SE5
SE5
C-5
Family
Fagaceae
Grossulariaceae
Hamamelidaceae
Juglandaceae
Lamiaceae
Lamiaceae
Liliaceae
Liliaceae
Liliaceae
Liliaceae
Moraceae
Oleaceae
Oleaceae
Oleaceae
Pinaceae
Pinaceae
Pinaceae
Pinaceae
Pinaceae
Pinaceae
Plantaginaceae
Plantaginaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Poaceae
Polygonaceae
Primulaceae
Pyrolaceae
Ranunculaceae
Ranunculaceae
Rhamnaceae
Rosaceae
Rosaceae
GENIVAR
Scientific Name
Quercus rubra
Ribes americanum
Hamamelis virginiana
Juglans nigra
Leonurus cardiaca
Mentha arvensis ssp. borealis
Maianthemum canadense
Maianthemum racemosum
Trillium erectum
Trillium grandiflorum
Morus alba
Fraxinus americana
Fraxinus nigra
Syringa vulgaris
Abies balsamea
Picea glauca
Picea pungens
Pinus resinosa
Pinus strobus
Pinus sylvestris
Plantago lanceolata
Plantago major
Grass sp.
Phalaris arundinacea
Phleum pratense
Rumex crispus
Lysimachia ciliata
Pyrola elliptica
Actaea rubra
Ranunculus acris
Rhamnus cathartica
Crataegus sp
Fragaria virginiana
Common Name
Red Oak
Wild Black Currant
Witch-hazel
Black Walnut
Motherwort
Wild Mint
Canada Mayflower
False Solomon's Seal
Red Trillium
White Trillium
White Mulberry
White Ash
Black Ash
Common Lilac
Balsam Fir
White Spruce
Colorado Spruce
Red Pine
Eastern White Pine
Scots Pine
Ribgrass
Common Plantain
Grass Species
Reed Canary Grass
Timothy
Curly Dock
Fringed Loosestrife
Shinleaf
Red Baneberry
Tall Buttercup
Common Buckthorn
Hawthorn Species
Common Strawberry
CC1
6
4
6
5
0
3
5
4
6
5
0
4
7
0
5
6
0
8
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
5
5
0
0
2
CW2
3
-3
3
3
5
-3
0
3
1
5
0
3
-4
5
-3
3
n/a
3
3
5
0
-1
-4
3
-1
-3
5
5
-2
3
1
GRANK3
G5
G5
G5
G5
G?
G5
G5
G5
G5
G5
G?
G5
G5
G?
G5
G5
G5
G5
G5
G?
G5
G5
G5
G?
G?
G5
G5
G5
G5
G?
G5
SRANK3
S5
S5
S5
S4
SE5
S5
S5
S5
S5
S5
SE5
S5
S5
SE5
S5
S5
S5
S5
S5
SE5
SE5
SE5
S5
SE5
SE5
S4
S5
S5
SE5
SE5
S5
C-6
Family
Rosaceae
Rosaceae
Rosaceae
Rosaceae
Rosaceae
Rosaceae
Rosaceae
Rosaceae
Rosaceae
Rosaceae
Rosaceae
Salicaceae
Salicaceae
Salicaceae
Salicaceae
Scrophulariaceae
Scrophulariaceae
Solanaceae
Tiliaceae
Typhaceae
Typhaceae
Ulmaceae
Verbenaceae
Violaceae
Vitaceae
Vitaceae
Scientific Name
Malus pumila
Potentilla recta
Prunus pensylvanica
Prunus serotina
Prunus virginiana
Rosa multiflora
Rosa sp.
Rubus allegheniensis
Rubus idaeus
Rubus pubescens
Sorbus americana
Populus balsamifera
Populus tremuloides
Salix eriocephala
Salix sp.
Penstemon digitalis
Verbascum thapsus
Solanum dulcamara
Tilia americana
Typha angustifolia
Typha latifolia
Ulmus americana
Verbena hastata
Viola sp.
Parthenocissus quinquefolia
Vitis sp.
Common Name
Common Apple
Rough-fruited Cinquefoil
Pin Cherry
Black Cherry
Choke Cherry
Multiflora Rose
Rose Species
Common Blackberry
Red Raspberry
Dwarf Raspberry
American Mountain-ash
Balsam Poplar
Trembling Aspen
Missouri Willow
Willow Species
Foxglove Beard-tongue
Common Mullein
Bittersweet Nightshade
Basswood
Narrow-leaved Cattail
Broad-leaved Cattail
American Elm
Blue Vervain
Violet Species
Virginia Creeper
Grape Species
CC1
0
0
3
3
2
0
2
0
4
8
4
2
4
6
0
0
4
3
3
3
4
6
-
CW2
5
5
4
3
1
3
2
5
-4
-1
-3
0
-3
1
5
0
3
-5
-5
-2
-4
1
-
GRANK3
G5
G?
G5
G5
G5
G?
G5
G5
G5
G5
G5
G5
G5
G5
G?
G?
G5
G5
G5
G5?
G5
G5
-
SRANK3
SE5
SE5
S5
S5
S5
SE4
S5
SE1
S5
S5
S5
S5
S5
S4S5
SE5
SE5
S5
SE5
S5
S5
S5
S4?
-
1
CC - Coefficient of Conservatism: From 0 – 10, “10” being most conservative, or only found only in relatively undisturbed habitats. 2 CW - Coefficient of Wetness:
3
From -5 – 5, “-5” being obligate wetland species, “5” being obligate upland species. Nature Conservancy conservation concern rankings (NHIC, 2010): G - Global
Level, S - Sub-national Rank (Ontario), E – Exotic, 1 - Critically Imperiled, 2 - Imperiled, 3 - Vulnerable, 4 - Apparently Secure, 5 - Secure.
GENIVAR
C-7
Appendix D
Site Photographs
Appendix D: Site Photographs
Image 1: Looking west at the culvert outlet on the east side of Dixie Road at the northwest corner of the
wooded area depicted on Figure 2 (May 17, 2013).
GENIVAR
H:\Proj\MARKHAM\13\13092-00\16 Investigation and Report\0464011\Tech\REPORT\Appendix D - Site
Photographs.docx
D-1
Image 2: Looking west at the artificial channel created by the modified culvert leading from the culvert on
the east side of Dixie Road down to the low-lying area on the west side of watercourse WC2 (May 17,
2013).
GENIVAR
Photographs.docx
D-2
Image 3: Looking northeast at the culvert marking the origin of watercourse WC2 within the Study Area
(May 17, 2013).
Image 4: Looking south at the grate marking the termination point of watercourse WC2 within the Study
Area. At this point, the flow goes underground, following a manmade path under the residential area to
the south (May 17, 2013).
GENIVAR
Photographs.docx
D-3
Image 5: Looking north and facing upstream along watercourse WC2 within the thicket swamp (May 17,
2013).
GENIVAR
Photographs.docx
D-4
Image 6: Looking north and facing upstream along watercourse WC3 within the utility corridor (May 17,
2013).
Image 7: Looking east at the manicured lawn area where the Eastern Meadowlark was spotted on June
10 and July 3, 2013 (July 3, 2013).
GENIVAR
Photographs.docx
D-5
Image 8: Looking west at the Dogwood and Willow thicket flanking watercourse WC3 between the Nu
West Ravine and the mature trees within the hydro corridor. While the stream corridor provides a linkage
between the two wooded areas, it does not meet the criteria of a woodland (May 17, 2013).
GENIVAR
Photographs.docx
D-6

Appendix B1 - Region of Durham

Transcription

Similar documents

Plawsworth Road, Sacriston, Durham Auction

Durham Careers in Hospitality

The Homestead Hotel and Condominium: Sanitary Drain Stack

Brochure - Habitat for Zoomanity A Life Science Webquest

The truth about… The truth about… habitats

The Avenue, Durham City 5 Bed House

Playdium is pleased to present our new Education Program

2012 Annual Report

- Local Biz

Section A2 - Event Advertisement